MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016363647 · doi:10.1101/pdb.prot080333

Monitoring Autophagic Flux Using Ref(2)P, the <i>Drosophila</i> p62 Ortholog

2014· article· en· W2016363647 on OpenAlexafffund
Lindsay DeVorkin, Sharon M. Gorski

Bibliographic record

VenueCold Spring Harbor Protocols · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutophagy in Disease and Therapy
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityBC Cancer Agency
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAutophagyUbiquitinDrosophila (subgenus)Cell biologyFlux (metallurgy)ProteasomeScaffold proteinChemistryProtein degradationBiologyBiochemistryGeneSignal transduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human p62, also known as Sequestome-1 (SQSTM1), is a multifunctional scaffold protein that contains many domains, including a Phox/Bem1P (PB1) multimerization domain, an ubiquitin-associated (UBA) domain, and a light chain 3 (LC3) recognition sequence. p62 binds ubiquitinated proteins and targets them for degradation by the proteasome. In addition, p62 directly binds LC3; this may serve as a mechanism to deliver ubiquitinated proteins for degradation by autophagy. During this process, p62 itself is degraded. The inhibition of autophagy leads to the accumulation of p62, indicating that it can be used as a marker of autophagic flux. Ref(2)P (refractory to sigma P), the Drosophila ortholog of p62, is also required for the formation of ubiquitinated protein aggregates. Ref(2)P contains a putative LC3-interacting region, and genetic inhibition of autophagy in Drosophila leads to the accumulation of Ref(2)P protein levels. Thus, like p62, Ref(2)P may serve as a marker of autophagic flux. Here we provide two procedures to examine Ref(2)P protein levels in Drosophila ovaries.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.287 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations46
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCold Spring Harbor ProtocolsSame topicAutophagy in Disease and TherapyFrench-language works237,207