MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087051708 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0040426

Pharyngeal Polysaccharide Deacetylases Affect Development in the Nematode C. elegans and Deacetylate Chitin In Vitro

2012· article· en· W2087051708 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ronald Jason Heustis, Hong K. Ng, Kenneth J. Brand, Meredith C. Rogers, Linda T. Le, Charles A. Specht, Juliet A. Fuhrman

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicNematode management and characterization studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Genetics
KeywordsChitinCaenorhabditis elegansBiologyNematodePolysaccharideGene knockdownMicrobiologyCuticle (hair)ChitinaseGeneBiochemistryTranscriptomeChitosanCell biologyGene expressionGeneticsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chitin (β-1,4-linked-N-acetylglucosamine) provides structural integrity to the nematode eggshell and pharyngeal lining. Chitin is synthesized in nematodes, but not in plants and vertebrates, which are often hosts to parasitic roundworms; hence, the chitin metabolism pathway is considered a potential target for selective interventions. Polysaccharide deacetylases (PDAs), including those that convert chitin to chitosan, have been previously demonstrated in protists, fungi and insects. We show that genes encoding PDAs are distributed throughout the phylum Nematoda, with the two paralogs F48E3.8 and C54G7.3 found in C. elegans. We confirm that the genes are somatically expressed and show that RNAi knockdown of these genes retards C. elegans development. Additionally, we show that proteins from the nematode deacetylate chitin in vitro, we quantify the substrate available in vivo as targets of these enzymes, and we show that Eosin Y (which specifically stains chitosan in fungal cells walls) stains the C. elegans pharynx. Our results suggest that one function of PDAs in nematodes may be deacetylation of the chitinous pharyngeal lining.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.678
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations25
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicNematode management and characterization studiesFrench-language works237,207