Huntingtin interacting protein 1 can regulate neurogenesis in <i>Drosophila</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Huntington's disease (HD) is associated with a range of cellular consequences including selective neuronal death and decreased levels of neurogenesis. Ultimately, these altered processes are dependent upon proteins that interact with Huntingtin (Htt) such as the Huntingtin-interacting protein 1 (Hip1) which has a reduced binding preference to expanded Htt. These effects are similar to those observed with modified Notch signal transduction. As Hip1 plays a key role in endocytosis and intracellular transport, and activation of the Notch signal requires both, we investigated putative links between Hip1 and Notch signaling in flies. We have identified two forms of Hip1 that may be produced through the use of alternative first exons: a version of Hip1 with a lipid-binding ANTH domain and Hip1DeltaANTH lacking this domain. The directed expression of Hip1 decreases, while expression of Hip1DeltaANTH increases, the density of sensory microchaetae on the dorsal notum, a classical model of neurogenesis. A reduction in microchaetae density associated with Notch(Microchaetae Deficient (MCD)) (N(MCD) ) alleles is sensitive to both Hip1 and Hip1DeltaANTH levels, as are the bristle phenotypes generated by misexpression of deltex, a key mediator of Notch signaling. Genetic studies further demonstrate that the observed effects of Hip1 and of Hip1DeltaANTH are sensitive to achaete gene dosage while insensitive to the levels of E(Spl), suggesting a non-canonical Notch neurogenic signal through a deltex-dependent pathway. The novel role we describe for Hip1 in Notch-mediated neurogenesis provides a functional link between Notch signaling and proteins related to HD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".