<i>Pink1 </i>and <i>parkin</i> demonstrate multifaceted roles when co-expressed with <i>Foxo</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pink1 has been linked to both autosomal recessive and sporadic forms of Parkinson disease. The Pink1 protein is thought to be involved in mitochondrial protection by interacting with parkin to prevent oxidative damage, maintain mitochondrial integrity and regulate mitophagy. Pink1 and parkin have been linked to components of the insulin receptor (INR) pathway, including PTEN, Akt and Foxo, but their effects in the INR pathway have been largely overlooked. To further investigate the roles of Pink1/parkin, we have performed co-expression studies to determine the effects Pink1 and parkin on the Foxo-induced phenotype of developmental defects in the Drosophila eye. We examined directed expression of Pink1, parkin, Pink1 or parkin mutants, and Pink1 or parkin interfering RNAs (RNAi) with the overexpression of Foxo in the developing eye of Drosophila. Our findings show that reduction of Pink1 suppresses the effects of Foxo overexpression, where co-overexpression with Pink1 or parkin increases the severity of the phenotype. This suggests that Pink1 and parkin are able to increase the pro-apoptotic effects of Foxo. Contrary to the view that Pink1 and parkin act exclusively as protective proteins in the cell, it is likely that the Pink1/parkin pathway is involved in aspects of cell fate decisions other than degrading toxic proteins and maintaining mitochondrial integrity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.024 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".