MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085269230 · doi:10.1021/pr060448k

Identification of Secreted Proteins during Skeletal Muscle Development

2007· article· en· W2085269230 on OpenAlexaff
X'avia C. Y. Chan, John C. McDermott, K. W. Michael Siu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Proteome Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone and Dental Protein Studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtracellular matrixC2C12Secretory proteinCell biologyProteomicsBiologySkeletal muscleProteomeSignal transductionBiochemistrySecretionChemistryMyocyteGeneMyogenesisEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The differentiation program of skeletal muscle cells is exquisitely sensitive to secreted proteins. We developed a strategy to maximize the discovery of secreted proteins, using mass spectrometry-based proteomics, from cultured muscle cells, C2C12, grown in a serum-free medium. This strategy led to the identification of 80 nonredundant proteins, of which 27 were secretory proteins that were identified with a minimum of two tryptic peptides. A number of the identified secretory proteins are involved in extracellular matrix remodeling, cellular proliferation, migration, and signaling. A putative network of proteins involving matrix metalloproteinase 2, SPARC, and cystatin C that all interact with TGFβ signaling has been postulated to contribute toward a functional role in the myogenic differentiation program. Keywords: Conditioned media (CM) • One-dimensional gel electrophoresis (1D-SDS-PAGE) • Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization quadrupole time-of-fight mass spectrometry (MALDI-QqTOF MS) • Extracelluar matrix (ECM) • Matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP2) • Secreted protein rich in cysteine protein (SPARC) • Transforming growth factor-beta (TGFβ)

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Citations80
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Proteome ResearchSame topicBone and Dental Protein StudiesFrench-language works237,207