MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062526825 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0079139

Zygotic Porcn Paternal Allele Deletion in Mice to Model Human Focal Dermal Hypoplasia

2013· article· en· W2062526825 on OpenAlexafffund
Steffen Biechele, Hibret A. Adissu, Brian Cox, Janet Rossant

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and rare skin diseases.
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMarch of Dimes Foundation
KeywordsBiologyAlleleWnt signaling pathwayPhenotypeX-inactivationGeneticsX chromosomeCell biologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In mouse and humans, the X-chromosomal Porcupine homolog (Porcn) gene is required for the acylation and secretion of all 19 Wnt ligands, thus representing a bottleneck in the secretion of Wnt ligands. In humans, mutations in PORCN cause the X-linked dominant syndrome Focal Dermal Hypoplasia (FDH, OMIM#305600). This disorder is characterized by ecto-mesodermal dysplasias and shows a highly variable phenotype, potentially due to individual X chromosome inactivation patterns. To improve the understanding of human FDH, we have established a mouse model by generation of Porcn heterozygous animals carrying a zygotic deletion of the paternal allele. We show that heterozygous female fetuses display variable defects that do not significantly affect survival in the uterus, but lead to perinatal lethality in more than 95% of females. Rare survivors develop to adulthood and display variable skeletal and skin defects, representing an adult zygotic mouse model for human FDH. Although not frequently reported in humans, we also observed bronchopneumonia, rhinitis, and otitis media in these animals, suggesting a potential link between Porcn function and the normal development of ciliated cells in these tissues.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicGenetic and rare skin diseases.French-language works237,207