MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027601054 · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1004683

Basement Membrane and Cell Integrity of Self-Tissues in Maintaining Drosophila Immunological Tolerance

2014· article· en· W2027601054 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Moon Jong Kim, Kwang‐Min Choe

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Genetics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicInvertebrate Immune Response Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Genetics
KeywordsBiologyBasement membraneCell biologyImmune systemLamininCellCell membraneAutoimmunityCell polarityImmunologyExtracellular matrixGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mechanism underlying immune system recognition of different types of pathogens has been extensively studied over the past few decades; however, the mechanism by which healthy self-tissue evades an attack by its own immune system is less well-understood. Here, we established an autoimmune model of melanotic mass formation in Drosophila by genetically disrupting the basement membrane. We found that the basement membrane endows otherwise susceptible target tissues with self-tolerance that prevents autoimmunity, and further demonstrated that laminin is a key component for both structural maintenance and the self-tolerance checkpoint function of the basement membrane. Moreover, we found that cell integrity, as determined by cell-cell interaction and apicobasal polarity, functions as a second discrete checkpoint. Target tissues became vulnerable to blood cell encapsulation and subsequent melanization only after loss of both the basement membrane and cell integrity.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 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

Citations59
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS GeneticsSame topicInvertebrate Immune Response MechanismsFrench-language works237,207