MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010933632 · doi:10.1159/000125415

Androgen Binding Sites in Human Temporal Cortex

2008· article· en· W2010933632 on OpenAlexafffund
Alain Sarrieau, John B. Mitchell, Samarthji Lal, André Olivier, Rémi Quirion, Michael J. Meaney

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroendocrinology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal and reproductive studies
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteDouglas College
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDihydrotestosteroneInternal medicineEndocrinologyRadioligandAndrogenTestosterone (patch)Androgen receptorBinding siteHuman brainCortex (anatomy)Temporal cortexReceptorChemistryBiologyIn vitroRadioligand AssayNeuroscienceBiochemistryHormoneMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have characterized putative androgen receptor binding sites in five separate biopsy samples of human temporal cortex from epilepsy patients using an in vitro exchange assay with soluble fractions and [3H]5 alpha-dihydrotestosterone as radioligand. The results revealed highly specific, saturable binding with an apparent affinity constant (Kd) of approximately 2 nM with a moderate capacity (Bmax) of approximately 50 fmol/mg protein. In competition studies, we found that only testosterone and 5 alpha-dihydrotestosterone competed effectively (i.e. at low nanomolar concentrations) for [3H]5 alpha-dihydrotestosterone binding sites. These data indicate the presence of androgen receptors in human cortex that are pharmacologically very similar to that previously described in rodent and infrahuman primate CNS, and suggest the existence of a possible mechanism whereby circulating androgens might influence neuronal events in human cortex.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations54
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroendocrinologySame topicHormonal and reproductive studiesFrench-language works237,207