MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052475624 · doi:10.1634/stemcells.20-2-119

Ligand/Receptor Signaling Threshold (LIST) Model Accounts for gp130‐Mediated Embryonic Stem Cell Self‐Renewal Responses to LIF and HIL‐6

2002· article· en· W2052475624 on OpenAlexafffund
Sowmya Viswanathan, Tania Benatar, Stefan Rose‐John, D. A. Lauffenburger, Peter W. Zandstra

Bibliographic record

VenueStem Cells · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDirectorate for Biological SciencesMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyLeukemia inhibitory factorGlycoprotein 130Cytokine receptorEmbryonic stem cellStem cell factorCell biologyCytokineReceptorStem cellEmbryoid bodySignal transductionImmunologyBiochemistryInterleukin 6Adult stem cellHaematopoiesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We previously demonstrated that embryonic stem (ES) cell self-renewal required sustained signaling by leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) in a concentration-dependent manner, allowing us to hypothesize that thresholds in ligand-receptor signaling modulate stem cell differentiation control. To test this hypothesis, we have experimentally and computationally compared the abilities of two gp130-signaling cytokines (LIF and Hyper-interleukin-6 [HIL-6]) to sustain ES cell self-renewal. Quantitative measurements of ES cell phenotypic markers (stage-specific embryonic antigen-1 and E-cadherin), functional assays (alkaline phosphatase activity and embryoid body formation efficiency), and transcription factor (Oct-4) expression over a range of LIF and HIL-6 concentrations demonstrated a superior ability of LIF to maintain ES cell pluripotentiality at higher concentrations (> or =500 pM). Additionally, we observed distinct qualitative differences in the ES cell self-renewal dose response profiles between the two cytokines. A computational model permitted calculation of the number of signaling complexes as a function of receptor expression, ligand concentration, and ligand/receptor-binding properties, generating predictions for the degree of self-renewal as a function of cytokine concentration by comparison of these calculated complex numbers to experimentally determined threshold cytokine concentrations. Model predictions, consistent with experimental data, indicated that differences in the potencies of these two cytokines were based primarily on differences in receptor-binding stoichiometries and properties. These results support a ligand/receptor signaling threshold model of ES cell fate modulation through appropriate types and levels of cytokine stimulation. Insights from these results may be more generally applicable to tissue-specific stem cells and could aid in the development of stem cell-based technologies.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations93
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStem CellsSame topicPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchFrench-language works237,207