MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025811736 · doi:10.1194/jlr.m400165-jlr200

Physiological importance of SR-BI in the in vivo metabolism of human HDL and LDL in male and female mice

2005· article· en· W2025811736 on OpenAlexaff
Mathieu R. Brodeur, Vilayphone Luangrath, Geneviève Bourret, Louise Falstrault, Louise Brissette

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lipid Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholesterol and Lipid Metabolism
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScavenger receptorIn vivoChemistryInternal medicineEndocrinologyKnockout mouseCholesteryl esterMetabolismReceptorScavengerCholesterolLDL receptorBiochemistryLipoproteinBiologyMedicineRadical

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The physiological role of murine scavenger receptor class B type I (SR-BI) was evaluated by in vivo clearances of human HDL3 and LDL in normal and SR-BI knockout (KO) mice. In normal mice, cholesteryl esters (CEs) were removed faster than proteins, indicating a selective uptake process from both HDL3 and LDL. SR-BI KO mice showed 80% losses of HDL-CE selective uptake and the complete loss of LDL-CE selective uptake in the first phase of clearance. However, the second phase was characterized by an acceleration of CE disappearance in SR-BI KO mice. Thus, SR-BI is the only murine receptor mediating HDL-CE selective uptake, whereas a SR-BI-independent pathway specific to LDL can rescue SR-BI deficiency. The analysis of LDL recovered 3 h after injection in mice from different genotypes revealed that LDLs are significantly depleted in CE (reduction from 19% to 50% of the CE/protein ratios). A smaller LDL size in comparison with that of noninjected LDL was also detectable but was more evident for LDL recovered from normal mice. All LDL preparations migrate faster than noninjected LDL on agarose-barbital gels. Thus, both SR-BI-dependent and -independent pathways lead to substantial changes in LDL.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.593
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations30
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lipid ResearchSame topicCholesterol and Lipid MetabolismFrench-language works237,207