MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028919524 · doi:10.1126/science.1105718

Regulation of the Polarity Protein Par6 by TGFß Receptors Controls Epithelial Cell Plasticity

2005· article· en· W2028919524 on OpenAlexaff
Barish Ozdamar, Rohit Bose, Miriam Barrios‐Rodiles, Hongrui Wang, Yue Zhang, Jeffrey L. Wrana

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicTGF-β signaling in diseases
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCell biologyEpithelial–mesenchymal transitionUbiquitin ligaseBiologyCell polarityMorphogenesisRegulatorMesenchymeTransforming growth factorCellMesenchymal stem cellUbiquitinDownregulation and upregulationBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transition of cells from an epithelial to a mesenchymal phenotype is a critical event during morphogenesis in multicellular organisms and underlies the pathology of many diseases, including the invasive phenotype associated with metastatic carcinomas. Transforming growth factor beta (TGFbeta) is a key regulator of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT). However, the molecular mechanisms that control the dissolution of tight junctions, an early event in EMT, remain elusive. We demonstrate that Par6, a regulator of epithelial cell polarity and tight-junction assembly, interacts with TGFbeta receptors and is a substrate of the type II receptor, TbetaRII. Phosphorylation of Par6 is required for TGFbeta-dependent EMT in mammary gland epithelial cells and controls the interaction of Par6 with the E3 ubiquitin ligase Smurf1. Smurf1, in turn, targets the guanosine triphosphatase RhoA for degradation, thereby leading to a loss of tight junctions. These studies define how an extracellular cue signals to the polarity machinery to control epithelial cell morphology.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations867
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicTGF-β signaling in diseasesFrench-language works237,207