MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Polyglutamine Proteins at the Pathogenic Threshold Display Neuron-Specific Aggregation in a Pan-Neuronal<i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i>Model

2006· article· en· W2093479824 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Heather R. Brignull, Finola E. Moore, Stephanie J. Tang, Richard I. Morimoto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of AlbertaNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNorthwestern University
KeywordsCaenorhabditis elegansBiologyNeuronNeurotoxicityMotor neuronPathogenesisNeurodegenerationNeuroscienceCell biologyDiseaseGeneticsChemistrySpinal cordGeneToxicityMedicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The basis of neuron-specific pathogenesis, resulting from the expression of misfolded proteins, is poorly understood and of central importance to an understanding of the cell-type specificity of neurodegenerative disease. In this study, we developed a new model for neuron-specific polyQ pathogenesis in Caenorhabditis elegans by pan-neuronal expression that exhibits polyQ length-dependent aggregation, neurotoxicity, and a pathogenic threshold at a length of 35-40 glutamines. Analysis of specific neurons in C. elegans revealed that only at the threshold length, but not at shorter or longer lengths, polyQ proteins can exist in a soluble state in certain lateral neurons or in an aggregated state in motor neurons of the same animal. These results provide direct experimental evidence that the expression of a single species of a toxic misfolded protein can exhibit a range of neuronal consequences.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations213
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model OrganismsFrench-language works237,207