MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141373423 · doi:10.2337/diabetes.50.12.2691

Intrinsic Defects in the T-Cell Lineage Results in Natural Killer T-Cell Deficiency and the Development of Diabetes in the Nonobese Diabetic Mouse

2001· article· en· W2141373423 on OpenAlexaff
Yang Yang, Min Bao, Ji‐Won Yoon

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsulitisNodNOD miceNatural killer T cellBiologyImmunologyPopulationT cellCD8Diabetes mellitusEndocrinologyAntigenImmune systemMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

T-cell-mediated autoimmune diabetes in nonobese diabetic (NOD) mice is closely associated with natural killer T (NKT)-cell deficiency. To determine whether intrinsic defects of the T-cell lineage contribute to the pathogenesis of the disease and NKT cell deficiency, we reconstituted the T-cell compartment in NOD.scid or BALB.scid mice with T-cells from NOD, nonobese diabetes-resistant (NOR), or AKR thymic precursor cells and examined the development of the NKT cell population. NKT cells developed well from AKR thymic precursor cells but not from other precursor cells in both recipient strains. Insulitis and diabetes developed only in the NOD.scid recipients of NOD or NOR precursor cells. When thymic precursor cells of beta2-microglobulin gene-deficient AKR mice, which have a deficient NKT population, were introduced into NOD.scid recipients, both CD4(+) and CD8(+) T-cell populations developed and the recipient mice developed insulitis and diabetes. We conclude that NKT cells originate from a T-cell-committed thymic precursor population and that the deficiency in the NKT cell population in NOD mice results from intrinsic defects within the T-cell lineage and plays a major role in the development of autoimmune diabetes in the presence of both the NOD thymus and antigen-presenting cells.

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)0.002
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.204
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations39
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicImmune Cell Function and InteractionFrench-language works237,207