MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110455952 · doi:10.1021/la803377s

Lipid Domain Morphologies in Phosphatidylcholine−Ceramide Monolayers

2009· article· en· W2110455952 on OpenAlexaff
Mikko Karttunen, Mikko Haataja, Matti Säily, Ilpo Vattulainen, Juha M. Holopainen

Bibliographic record

VenueLangmuir · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLipid Membrane Structure and Behavior
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCeramidePhosphatidylcholineMonolayerChemistryLipid bilayerSphingolipidDomain (mathematical analysis)BiophysicsPhospholipidBiochemistryMembraneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In cells, one of the main roles of ceramide-enriched membrane domains is to recruit or exclude intracellular signaling molecules and receptors, thereby facilitating signal transduction cascades. Accordingly, in model membranes, even low contents of ceramide segregate into lateral domains. The impact of the N-acyl chain on this segregation and on the morphology of the domains remains to be explored. Using Langmuir monolayers, we have systematically studied binary mixtures of 1,2-dimyristoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine (DMPC) and ceramide (2:1, molar ratio) and varied the N-acyl chain length of ceramide from 2 to 24 carbon atoms (Cer2 to Cer24). Fluid Cer2, Cer6, and Cer8/DMPC mixtures were miscible at all surface pressures. Longer ceramides, however, formed surface pressure-dependent immiscible mixtures with DMPC. The domain morphology under fluorescence microscopy after including a trace amount of fluorescent NBD-phosphatidylcholine into DMPC/Cer mixtures was found to be very sensitive to the N-acyl chain length. Shorter ceramides (Cer10-Cer14) formed flower-like (seaweed) domains, whereas longer ceramides (N-acyl chain length>14 carbon atoms) formed round and regular domains. We attribute the formation of the flower patterns to diffusive morphological instabilities during domain growth.

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 score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.474

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations32
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLangmuirSame topicLipid Membrane Structure and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207