MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089533321 · doi:10.1093/ps/80.2.161

Expression of Protein Tyrosine Kinases and Stem Cell Factor in Chicken Blastodermal Cells

2001· article· en· W2089533321 on OpenAlexafffund
Erika Sasaki, R. J. Etches

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Genetics and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyMolecular biologyStem cell factorStem cellSomatic cellGeneCellular differentiationTyrosine kinaseCell biologySignal transductionGeneticsHaematopoiesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chicken blastodermal cells (CBC) from Stage X embryos, which were isolated from newly laid, fertile, unincubated eggs, are pluripotent cells and can produce somatic and germline chimeras when injected into recipient stage X embryos. The CBC retain their pluripotential ability for up to 7 d in vitro. The molecular mechanisms that control proliferation and differentiation of CBC are largely unknown, although protein tyrosine kinases (PTK) are known to play important roles in these processes in similar cells. To understand better the molecular mechanisms of proliferation and differentiation in CBC, expression profiles of PTK and stem cell factor (SCF) were analyzed by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) using gene-specific and degenerate oligonucleotide primers. Seventeen distinct PTK, including 14 receptor-type and 3 nonreceptor-type PTK and SCF were identified by RT-PCR. Expression of all of the genes was confirmed by northern blot analysis. The northern blot analysis showed that all probes hybridized with one or more transcripts at various expression levels. The expression of the 17 PTK and SCF genes in CBC suggests that they might play a role in signal transduction pathways that control the proliferation or differentiation in CBC.

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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations3
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoultry ScienceSame topicAnimal Genetics and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207