Keratin 8 Is Required for the Maintenance of Architectural Structure in Thymus Epithelium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Keratins (Ks), the intermediate filament (IF) proteins of epithelia, are coordinately expressed as pairs in a cell-lineage and differentiation manner. Cortical thymic epithelial cells (cTECs) predominantly express the simple epithelium keratin 8/18 (K8/K18) pair, whereas medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs) express the stratified epithelium K5/K14 pair, with TECs exhibiting K5 and K8 at the cortico-medullary junction in mature thymus. In the work reported here, we used wild-type (WT) and K8-knockout (K8-null) mice to address the contribution of K8/K18 IFs in the maintenance of the thymic epithelial structure. K8-null thymus maintained the differential cell segregation at the cortex versus the medulla observed in WT thymus, and the distribution of immature thymocytes at the cortex. The K8/K18 loss did not affect thymocyte development. However, it massively perturbed the TEC morphology both at the cortex and the medulla, along with a prominent depletion of cTECs. Such tissue alterations coincided with an increase in apoptosis and a reduced expression of Albatross (Fas-binding factor-1), also known for its capacity to bind K8/18 IFs. In addition, the K8/K18 loss affected the distribution of K5/K14-positive mTECs, but not their differentiation status. Together, the results indicate that K8/K18 IFs constitute key promoters of the thymic epithelium integrity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".