MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129135677 · doi:10.1093/hmg/11.8.945

Targeted disruption of Huntingtin-associated protein-1 (Hap1) results in postnatal death due to depressed feeding behavior

2002· article· en· W2129135677 on OpenAlexafffund
Edmond Y.W. Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Molecular Genetics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicRegulation of Appetite and Obesity
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British Columbia
FundersMedical Research CouncilMichael Smith Health Research BCNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyEndocrinologyLeptinInternal medicineHypothalamusHuntingtinAtrophyObesityGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

HAP-1 is a huntingtin-associated protein that is enriched in the brain. To gain insight into the normal physiological role of HAP-1, mice were generated with homozygous disruption at the Hap1 locus. Loss of HAP-1 expression did not alter the gross brain expression levels of its interacting partners, huntingtin and p150glued. Newborn Hap1(-/-) animals are observed at the expected Mendelian frequency suggesting a non-essential role of HAP-1 during embryogenesis. Postnatally, Hap1(-/-) pups show decreased feeding behavior that ultimately leads to malnutrition, dehydration and premature death. Seventy percent of Hap1(-/-) pups fail to survive past the second postnatal day (P2) and 100% of Hap1(-/-) pups fail to survive past P9. From P2 until death, Hap1(-/-) pups show markedly decreased amounts of ingested milk. Hap1(-/-) pups that survive to P8 show signs of starvation including greatly decreased serum leptin levels, decreased brain weight and atrophy of the brain cortical mantel. HAP-1 is particularly enriched in the hypothalamus, which is well documented to regulate feeding behavior. Our results demonstrate that HAP-1 plays an essential role in regulating postnatal feeding.

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 score0.311
Threshold uncertainty score0.797

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations79
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Molecular GeneticsSame topicRegulation of Appetite and ObesityFrench-language works237,207