MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099635718 · doi:10.1091/mbc.e11-01-0054

AP-1 and clathrin are essential for secretory granule biogenesis in<i>Drosophila</i>

2011· article· en· W2099635718 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Burgess, Miluska Jauregui, Julie Tan, Janet Rollins, Sylvie Lallet, Peter A. Leventis, Gabrielle L. Boulianne, Henry C. Chang, Roland Le Borgne, Helmut Krämer, Julie A. Brill

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology of the Cell · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Eye Institute
KeywordsClathrinBiologyCell biologySecretory proteinGranule (geology)ColocalizationSecretory pathwaySecretionGolgi apparatusSecretory VesicleBiogenesisDrosophila melanogasterSignal transducing adaptor proteinEndocytosisExocytosisSignal transductionBiochemistryEndoplasmic reticulumReceptorGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regulated secretion of hormones, digestive enzymes, and other biologically active molecules requires the formation of secretory granules. Clathrin and the clathrin adaptor protein complex 1 (AP-1) are necessary for maturation of exocrine, endocrine, and neuroendocrine secretory granules. However, the initial steps of secretory granule biogenesis are only minimally understood. Powerful genetic approaches available in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster were used to investigate the molecular pathway for biogenesis of the mucin-containing "glue granules" that form within epithelial cells of the third-instar larval salivary gland. Clathrin and AP-1 colocalize at the trans-Golgi network (TGN) and clathrin recruitment requires AP-1. Furthermore, clathrin and AP-1 colocalize with secretory cargo at the TGN and on immature granules. Finally, loss of clathrin or AP-1 leads to a profound block in secretory granule formation. These findings establish a novel role for AP-1- and clathrin-dependent trafficking in the biogenesis of mucin-containing secretory granules.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations99
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology of the CellSame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207