MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109826292 · doi:10.1091/mbc.e07-09-0892

Arp2 Links Autophagic Machinery with the Actin Cytoskeleton

2008· article· en· W2109826292 on OpenAlexaff
Iryna Monastyrska, Congcong He, Jiefei Geng, Adam D. Hoppe, Zhijian Li, Daniel J. Klionsky

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology of the Cell · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutophagy in Disease and Therapy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesUniversité de GenèveMedical School, University of MichiganNational Institutes of HealthBrandeis UniversityYale University
KeywordsCell biologyVacuoleBiologyLysosomeOrganelleCytoplasmVesicleAutophagyCytosolTransport proteinActin cytoskeletonCytoskeletonCellMembraneBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Macroautophagy involves lysosomal/vacuolar elimination of long-lived proteins and entire organelles from the cytosol. The process begins with formation of a double-membrane vesicle that sequesters bulk cytoplasm, or a specific cargo destined for lysosomal/vacuolar delivery. The completed vesicle fuses with the lysosome/vacuole limiting membrane, releasing its content into the organelle lumen for subsequent degradation and recycling of the resulting macromolecules. A majority of the autophagy-related (Atg) proteins are required at the step of vesicle formation. The integral membrane protein Atg9 cycles between certain intracellular compartments and the vesicle nucleation site, presumably to supply membranes necessary for macroautophagic vesicle formation. In this study we have tracked the movement of Atg9 over time in living cells by using real-time fluorescence microscopy. Our results reveal that an actin-related protein, Arp2, briefly colocalizes with Atg9 and directly regulates the dynamics of Atg9 movement. We propose that proteins of the Arp2/3 complex regulate Atg9 transport for specific types of autophagy.

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations120
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology of the CellSame topicAutophagy in Disease and TherapyFrench-language works237,207