MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072615002 · doi:10.1089/thy.2009.0363

Degradation of Thyroid Hormone Receptor Beta 1: Existence of Stable and Unstable Forms

2011· article· en· W2072615002 on OpenAlexafffund
Mylène Brunelle, Tania Fayad, Marie‐France Langlois

Bibliographic record

VenueThyroid · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsProteasomeCycloheximideReceptorProtein degradationPopulationUbiquitinCell biologyHEK 293 cellsBiologyChemistryBiochemistryMolecular biologyProtein biosynthesisGeneMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The degradation of many nuclear receptors is controlled by ligand-binding and mediated by the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. However, the mechanisms implicated in thyroid hormone receptor (TR) degradation remain unclear. Our objective was to define the kinetics, mechanisms, and sub-cellular fractions involved in TRs degradation. METHODS: We used pulse-chase analyses, time-course experiments carried out in presence of cycloheximide (to inhibit new protein synthesis), and biochemical fractionation with Western blot analyses to determine the kinetics of the degradation of the TRβ isoform, TRβ1, in transiently transfected QBI-HEK 293A cells. RESULTS: We observed that TRβ1 degradation is mediated by the proteasome pathway. Also, the kinetics of TRβ1 degradation is atypical due to the co-existence of more than one TRβ1 population, located in different cellular compartments and having different stability profiles. Moreover, TRβ1 degradation was unaffected by a mutation in its putative PEST motif, which confers turnover of other proteins. CONCLUSION: Our findings introduce novel evidence suggesting that stable and unstable forms of TRβ1, which might have distinct functions, co-exist in cells.

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 score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations9
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThyroidSame topicThyroid Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207