MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032352567 · doi:10.4161/auto.29639

BCL2 and related prosurvival proteins require BAK1 and BAX to affect autophagy

2014· article· en· W2032352567 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lisa Lindqvist, David L. Vaux

Bibliographic record

VenueAutophagy · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutophagy in Disease and Therapy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAustralian Government
KeywordsAutophagyBECN1MCL1Cell biologyBiologyApoptosisProgrammed cell deathATG8Lipid-anchored proteinEndogenyDownregulation and upregulationBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is widely thought that prosurvival BCL2 family members not only inhibit apoptosis, but also block autophagy by directly binding to BECN1/Beclin 1. To distinguish whether BCL2, BCL2L1/BCL-XL, or MCL1 influence autophagy directly, or indirectly, through their effects on apoptosis, we compared normal cells to those lacking BAX and BAK1. In cells able to undergo mitochondria-mediated apoptosis, inhibiting the endogenous prosurvival BCL2 family members induces both autophagy and cell death, but when BAX and BAK1 are deleted, neither inhibiting nor overexpressing BCL2, BCL2L1, or MCL1 causes any detectable effect on LC3B lipidation, LC3B turnover, or autolysosome formation. These results show that prosurvival BCL2 family members influence autophagy only indirectly, by inhibiting activation of BAX and BAK1.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations82
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAutophagySame topicAutophagy in Disease and TherapyFrench-language works237,207