MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062332342 · doi:10.1038/icb.2009.39

X chromosome reactivation perturbs intracellular self/not‐self discrimination

2009· review· en· W2062332342 on OpenAlexaff
Donald R. Forsdyke

Bibliographic record

VenueImmunology and Cell Biology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicT-cell and B-cell Immunology
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsX chromosomeImmune systemDosage compensationIntracellularChromosomeBiologySelf ToleranceGeneDiseaseAutoimmune diseaseGeneticsImmunologyHormoneCell biologyAutoimmunityAntibodyMedicineEndocrinologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New reports indicate a chromosomal rather than hormonal basis for the susceptibility of females to autoimmune disease. It is held that if females reactivate an inactivated X chromosome, there will be overexpression of certain X-located genes affecting immune function. Hence, normal mechanisms of self/not-self discrimination might be impaired resulting in immune reaction to self antigens. However, the data are also consistent with the long-held view that the demands of intracellular self/not-self discrimination have driven the evolution of X-chromosome dosage compensation. It was proposed that, whether cells are in male or female bodies, concentrations of proteins are fine-tuned up to their aggregation thresholds. A disruption of this equilibrium, by agents originating either externally (for example, virus) or internally (for example, reactivated X chromosome), generates homoaggregates that trigger responses against the respective not-self or self antigens. Thus, female susceptibility to autoimmune disease may not be because certain immune system genes happen to be X-located, but because self/not-self discrimination was the raison d'être for X-chromosome dosage compensation in the first place.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.233 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImmunology and Cell BiologySame topicT-cell and B-cell ImmunologyFrench-language works237,207