MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027232962 · doi:10.1042/bj3480439

Zebrafish ftz-f1 gene has two promoters, is alternatively spliced, and is expressed in digestive organs

2000· article· en· W2027232962 on OpenAlexafffund
Wen-Wen Lin, Hsin-Wei WANG, Cristina SUM, Dong Liu, Choy L. Hew, Bon‐chu Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemical Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and Clinical Aspects of Sex Determination and Chromosomal Abnormalities
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersMedical Research CouncilMedical Research Council CanadaAcademia SinicaHospital for Sick ChildrenNational Science Council
KeywordsBiologyPromoterZebrafishGeneAlternative splicingTranscription (linguistics)Molecular biologyExonMessenger RNAGeneticsGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fushi-tarazu Factor-1 (FTZ-F1) is a family of nuclear receptors involved in various developmental processes. We have cloned a zebrafish FTZ-F1 gene, termed ff1, which belongs to the fetoprotein transcription factor/liver receptor homologue-1 (FTF/LRH-1) subgroup of the FTZ-F1 family. Four transcripts arise as a result of differential promoter usage and alternative splicing at the 3'-most exons. The longer transcript, form A, encodes a transcriptional activator. The shorter transcript, form B, lacks the activation domain, and hence could not activate transcription. The difference in promoter usage generates FF1 proteins with different N-terminal sequences. All four transcripts appear to be expressed in most of the adult tissues, whereas, during embryo development, the IIA form is the predominant transcript. Reverse transcriptase-PCR and in situ hybridization experiments showed that the ff1 transcript is expressed in the hypothalamus, spinal cord, mandibular arch and digestive organs, including pancreas, liver, and intestine. The expression of ff1 in the digestive organs implies its function in gut development.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations39
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemical JournalSame topicGenetic and Clinical Aspects of Sex Determination and Chromosomal AbnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207