MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100939731 · doi:10.1091/mbc.e08-05-0469

INF1 Is a Novel Microtubule-associated Formin

2008· article· en· W2100939731 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin G. Young, Susan Thurston, Sarah J. Copeland, Chelsea A. Smallwood, John W. Copeland

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology of the Cell · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCellular Mechanics and Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersDartmouth College
KeywordsForminsMicrotubuleCell biologyBiologyActinCytoskeletonMicrotubule nucleationMDia1Actin cytoskeletonCentrosomeCellGeneticsCell cycle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Formin proteins, characterized by the presence of conserved formin homology (FH) domains, play important roles in cytoskeletal regulation via their abilities to nucleate actin filament formation and to interact with multiple other proteins involved in cytoskeletal regulation. The C-terminal FH2 domain of formins is key for actin filament interactions and has been implicated in playing a role in interactions with microtubules. Inverted formin 1 (INF1) is unusual among the formin family in having the conserved FH1 and FH2 domains in its N-terminal half, with its C-terminal half being composed of a unique polypeptide sequence. In this study, we have examined a potential role for INF1 in regulating microtubule structure. INF1 associates discretely with microtubules, and this association is dependent on a novel C-terminal microtubule-binding domain. INF1 expressed in fibroblast cells induced actin stress fiber formation, coalignment of microtubules with actin filaments, and the formation of bundled, acetylated microtubules. Endogenous INF1 showed an association with acetylated microtubules, and knockdown of INF1 resulted in decreased levels of acetylated microtubules. Our data suggests a role for INF1 in microtubule modification and potentially in coordinating microtubule and F-actin structure.

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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.227
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

Citations64
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology of the CellSame topicCellular Mechanics and InteractionsFrench-language works237,207