MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051308195 · doi:10.1159/000178747

Binding of Methyltrienolone to Various Androgen-Dependent and Androgen-Responsive Tissues in Four Animal Species

2008· article· en· W2051308195 on OpenAlexaff
Jean Y. Dub eacute, Roland R. Tremblay, Pierre Chapdelaine

Bibliographic record

VenueHormone Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal and reproductive studies
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier de l'Université Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAndrogen receptorAndrogenDihydrotestosteroneCytosolEndocrinologyChemistryReceptorInternal medicineBulbocavernosus reflexIn vitroBiologyHormoneBiochemistryEnzymeMedicineProstate cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comparative sucrose gradient studies of the in vitro binding of dihydrotestosterone (DHT) and of a synthetic androgen, methyltrienolone (R 1881), have been done with the cytosols of various tissues of the rat, mouse, cock and man. With rat prostate cytosol, the amount of R 1881 and DHT binding in the 8-9S region of the gradient was found to be comparable. Specific 8-9S peaks of R 1881 were also found in rat levator ani/bulbocavernosus and skeletal muscles and in the mouse kidney. Only 4-5S peaks could be demonstrated in the cock's comb while DHT under the same conditions showed both 8-9S and 4-5S binding. Binding of R 1881 to the cytosol of the hyperplastic prostate was polydispersed, and showed evidence of the presence of aggregates. Evidence was also found that R 1881 could bind to the progesterone receptor in rat uterus. Our study supports the theory that in a given species the androgen receptors are similar if not identical in all the tissues. The synthetic androgen R 1881 appears to be a useful tool for androgen receptor studies in various animal species provided that the tissue under study contains no progesterone receptor.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations19
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHormone ResearchSame topicHormonal and reproductive studiesFrench-language works237,207