MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Prohibitins: emerging roles in diverse functions

2006· review· en· W2013297915 on OpenAlexaff
Suresh Mishra, Leigh C. Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLipid metabolism and biosynthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProhibitinBiologyCell biologyTranscription factorMitochondrionGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prohibitins, Phb1 and Phb2 are highly conserved proteins in eukaryotic cells that are present in multiple cellular compartments. Initial investigations focused on the role of Phb1 as an inhibitor of cell proliferation hence the original name prohibitin. However both proteins appear to have a diverse range of functions and recent evidence suggests that the prohibitins have very similar but as yet only partially understood functions. In addition to their role as chaperone proteins in the mitochondria, and their ability to target to lipid rafts, their is now compelling evidence that both prohibitins are localized in the nucleus and can modulate transcriptional activity by interacting with various transcription factors, including the steroid hormone receptors, either directly or indirectly. In addition Phb1 and Phb2 are present in the circulation and can be internalized when added to cultured cells suggesting that the circulating prohibitins may have some regulatory role. This review presents some of the recent developments in prohibitin research and focuses on the similarities in the structure and function of these interesting proteins.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations290
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cellular and Molecular MedicineSame topicLipid metabolism and biosynthesisFrench-language works237,207