MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136155663 · doi:10.1182/blood.v97.5.1343

SHIP's C-terminus is essential for its hydrolysis of PIP3 and inhibition of mast cell degranulation

2001· article· en· W2136155663 on OpenAlexaff
Jacqueline E. Damen, Mark D. Ware, Janet Kalesnikoff, Michael R. Hughes, Gerald Krystal

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicMast cells and histamine
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDegranulationMast cellCell biologyPhosphorylationPhosphataseBiochemistryChemistryBiologyImmunologyReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The SH2-containing inositol-5'-phosphatase, SHIP, restrains bone marrow-derived mast cell (BMMC) degranulation, at least in part, by hydrolyzing phosphatidylinositol (PI)-3-kinase generated PI-3,4,5-P(3) (PIP3) to PI-3,4-P(2). To determine which domains within SHIP influence its ability to hydrolyze PIP3, bone marrow from SHIP(-/-) mice was retrovirally infected with various SHIP constructs. Introduction of wild-type SHIP into SHIP(-/-) BMMCs reverted the Steel factor (SF)-induced increases in PIP3, calcium entry, and degranulation to those observed in SHIP(+/+) BMMCs. A 5'-phosphatase dead SHIP, however, could not revert the SHIP(-/-) response, whereas a SHIP mutant in which the 2 NPXY motifs were converted to NPXFs (2NPXF) could partially revert the SHIP(-/-) response. SF stimulation of BMMCs expressing the 2NPXF, which could not bind Shc, led to the same level of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) phosphorylation as that seen in BMMCs expressing the other constructs. Surprisingly, C-terminally truncated forms of SHIP, lacking different amounts of the proline rich C-terminus, could not revert the SHIP(-/-) response at all. These results suggest that the C-terminus plays a critical role in enabling SHIP to hydrolyze PIP(3) and inhibit BMMC degranulation.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations71
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicMast cells and histamineFrench-language works237,207