Kidney proximal tubule cells: Epithelial cells without EGTA-extractable annexins?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The expression and the subcellular localizations of annexins I, II, IV, VI, and XIII in renal epithelial cells were investigated, using immunological techniques with specific monoclonal antibodies. Upon performing Western blotting experiments, no annexins VI and XIII were detected in kidney, whereas annexins I, II, and IV were. Immunofluorescence labelling procedure performed on thin frozen renal sections showed the presence of these three annexins along the plasma membrane of the collecting duct cells with a restricted expression of annexin I at principal cells. Annexin I was also found present in some glomerular cells. None of these annexins, however, were detected in the proximal tubular cells upon performing immunofluorescence labelling and electrophoretic analysis on an EGTA (ethylenebis(oxyethylenenitrilo)tetraacetic acid)-extractable annexin fraction prepared from freshly isolated cells. This is the first time a mammalian epithelial cell has been found to express non-typical annexin (at least partly solubilized with EGTA). However, when these cells were grown in primary culture, they were found to express annexins I, II, IV, and V. As well as being located along the basolateral membrane, annexins I and II are also present on vesicles, which suggests that these annexins may be involved in vesicular traffic under cell culture conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".