MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101821211 · doi:10.1139/y10-009

Bidirectional communication between oocytes and follicle cells: ensuring oocyte developmental competence

2010· review· en· W2101821211 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Gerald M. Kidder, Barbara C. Vanderhyden

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsChildren’s Health Research InstituteWestern UniversityLondon Health Sciences CentreOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMedical Research Council Canada
KeywordsOocyteCell biologyBiologySomatic cellOogenesisFollicleParacrine signallingMeiosisGermlineFolliculogenesisOvarian follicleSignallingEmbryogenesisEmbryoEndocrinologyGeneticsReceptorHormoneGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Female fertility is determined to a large extent by the quality (developmental competence) of the oocyte as reflected in its ability to undergo meiosis, be fertilized, and give rise to a healthy embryo. Growth of the mammalian oocyte is coordinated with that of the follicle that encloses it by the actions of signals that pass in both directions between the germline and somatic components. This review summarizes what is known about the roles played by 2 different modes of intrafollicular signalling in oogenesis: paracrine factors activating receptors on the opposite cell type, and direct sharing of small molecules throughout the follicle via gap junction channels. Recent evidence indicates that these 2 modes of signalling interact to regulate oocyte growth and granulosa cell proliferation and that defects in either can contribute to female infertility.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations297
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207