MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018774226 · doi:10.1007/s00018-010-0436-1

Rab protein evolution and the history of the eukaryotic endomembrane system

2010· review· en· W2018774226 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew Brighouse, Joel B. Dacks, Mark C. Field

Bibliographic record

VenueCellular and Molecular Life Sciences · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCellular transport and secretion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWellcome Trust
KeywordsEndomembrane systemRabBiologyComputational biologyComparative genomicsThree-domain systemGenomeCell biologyEvolutionary biologyGenomicsGeneGeneticsVesicleGTPase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spectacular increases in the quantity of sequence data genome have facilitated major advances in eukaryotic comparative genomics. By exploiting homology with classical model organisms, this makes possible predictions of pathways and cellular functions currently impossible to address in intractable organisms. Echoing realization that core metabolic processes were established very early following evolution of life on earth, it is now emerging that many eukaryotic cellular features, including the endomembrane system, are ancient and organized around near-universal principles. Rab proteins are key mediators of vesicle transport and specificity, and via the presence of multiple paralogues, alterations in interaction specificity and modification of pathways, contribute greatly to the evolution of complexity of membrane transport. Understanding system-level contributions of Rab proteins to evolutionary history provides insight into the multiple processes sculpting cellular transport pathways and the exciting challenges that we face in delving further into the origins of membrane trafficking specificity.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.753

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 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

Citations93
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCellular and Molecular Life SciencesSame topicCellular transport and secretionFrench-language works237,207