MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091803609 · doi:10.1159/000185286

Verotoxin Receptor Glycolipid in Human Renal Tissue

2008· article· en· W2091803609 on OpenAlexaff
Beth Boyd, Clifford A. Lingwood

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œNephron journals/Nephron journals · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicComplement system in diseases
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlycolipidGlobotriaosylceramideMedullaKidneyRenal cortexReceptorMedicineRenal medullaInternal medicineEndocrinologyCeramidePathologyBiologyImmunologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infection with verotoxin producing Escherichia coli has been strongly implicated in the etiology of the hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS). We have previously shown that this toxin specifically binds to a glycolipid receptor-globotriosyl ceramide (Gb3). We have therefore quantitated the level of this glycolipid by HPLC in human renal cortex and medulla as a function of age. We have also measured the binding of verotoxin to Gb3 isolated from each renal tissue sample. Gb3 was a major component of the glycolipid fraction of all renal samples analyzed. The levels were found to be higher in the cortex than medulla, correlating with the clinical incidence of renal lesions in HUS, but reduced in the kidneys of infants as compared to adults. Verotoxin binding was directly proportional to the renal Gb3 content. Thus, human renal tissue is a rich source of the verotoxin receptor glycolipid. However, changes in receptor concentration cannot explain the age-related incidence of HUS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations206
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œNephron journals/Nephron journalsSame topicComplement system in diseasesFrench-language works237,207