MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tau‐tubulin kinase 1 (TTBK1), a neuron‐specific tau kinase candidate, is involved in tau phosphorylation and aggregation

2006· article· en· W2100143869 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shinji Sato, Ronald L. Cerny, James L. Buescher, Tsuneya Ikezu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurochemistry · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthJewish General Hospital
KeywordsPhosphorylationCyclin-dependent kinase 5Tau proteinKinaseDYRK1ACell biologyBiologyCasein kinase 2Casein kinase 1ChemistryBiochemistryProtein kinase CProtein kinase AAlzheimer's diseaseMitogen-activated protein kinase kinaseMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurofibrillary tangles, which are major pathological hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD), are composed of paired helical filaments (PHFs) containing hyperphosphorylated tau. Specific kinases regulate tau phosphorylation and are closely linked to the pathogenesis of AD. We have characterized a human tau-tubulin kinase 1 (TTBK1) gene located on chromosome 6p21.1. TTBK1 is a serine/threonine/tyrosine kinase that is conserved among species and belongs to the casein kinase 1 superfamily. It is specifically expressed in the brain, especially in the cytoplasm of cortical and hippocampal neurons. TTBK1 phosphorylates tau proteins in both a Mg2+- and a Mn2+-dependent manner. Phosphopeptide mapping and immunoblotting analysis confirmed a direct tau phosphorylation by TTBK1 at Ser198, Ser199, Ser202 and Ser422, which are also phosphorylated in PHFs. TTBK1 also induces tau aggregation in human neuronal cells in a dose-dependent manner. We conclude that TTBK1 is a neuron-specific dual kinase involved in tau phosphorylation at AD-related sites and is also associated with tau aggregation.

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 score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations141
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurochemistrySame topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207