MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128814992 · doi:10.1083/jcb.201111136

T granules in human platelets function in TLR9 organization and signaling

2012· article· en· W2128814992 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan N. Thon, Christopher G. Peters, Kellie R. Machlus, Rukhsana Aslam, Jesse W. Rowley, Hannah J. MacLeod, Matthew T. Devine, Tobias A. Fuchs, Andrew S. Weyrich, John W. Semple, Robert Flaumenhaft, Joseph E. Italiano

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Cell Biology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Response and Inflammation
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsTLR9Cell biologyBiologyToll-Like Receptor 9PlateletReceptorIntracellularInnate immune systemCompartment (ship)InflammationPlatelet activationSignal transductionImmune systemImmunologyGeneBiochemistryGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human and murine platelets (PLTs) variably express toll-like receptors (TLRs), which link the innate and adaptive immune responses during infectious inflammation and atherosclerotic vascular disease. In this paper, we show that the TLR9 transcript is specifically up-regulated during pro-PLT production and is distributed to a novel electron-dense tubular system-related compartment we have named the T granule. TLR9 colocalizes with protein disulfide isomerase and is associated with either VAMP 7 or VAMP 8, which regulates its distribution in PLTs on contact activation (spreading). Preincubation of PLTs with type IV collagen specifically increased TLR9 and CD62P surface expression and augmented oligodeoxynucleotide (ODN) sequestration and PLT clumping upon addition of bacterial/viral ODNs. Collectively, this paper (a) tracks TLR9 to a new intracellular compartment in PLTs and (b) describes a novel mechanism of TLR9 organization and signaling in human PLTs.

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)0.001
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.216
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations192
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Cell BiologySame topicImmune Response and InflammationFrench-language works237,207