Nod-like receptors in intestinal host defense
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Nod-like receptors (NLRs) are intracellular innate immune sensors of microbes and danger signals that control multiple aspects of inflammatory responses. We review the evidence that highlights the critical importance of NLRs in the host response to intestinal pathogens. Moreover, we discuss the potential roles played by NLRs in the dynamic control of the intestinal microbiota and how commensal microorganisms may affect host susceptibility to enteric bacterial pathogens through interactions with NLRs as well as with invading pathogens. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies targeting the intestinal microbiota in the context of NLR deficiencies suggest inherent alterations in bacterial density or abundance may underlie the development of inflammatory diseases. As commensal microorganisms may also affect host susceptibility to enteric bacterial pathogens, NLRs might promote intestinal innate immune defense through mechanisms more complex than previously anticipated. SUMMARY: The inclusion of the intestinal microbiota as a critical parameter in innate immunity represents an exciting new dimension for understanding NLR functioning and the clinical implications for human health.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".