MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143151869 · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0902178

Cutting Edge: Requirement of MARCH-I-Mediated MHC II Ubiquitination for the Maintenance of Conventional Dendritic Cells

2009· article· en· W2143151869 on OpenAlexaff
Mari Ohmura‐Hoshino, Yohei Matsuki, Mari Mito-Yoshida, Eiji Gotō, Masami Aoki-Kawasumi, Manabu Nakayama, Osamu Ohara, Satoshi Ishido

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsUbiquitin ligaseUbiquitinMHC class IIMHC class ICell biologyMajor histocompatibility complexIn vivoChemistryBiologyImmunologyGeneticsImmune systemBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MARCH-I (membrane-associated RING-CH I) has been suggested as a physiological E3 ubiquitin ligase for both MHC class II (MHC II) and B7-2. In this study, we show that MARCH-I-mediated MHC II ubiquitination is necessary for the maintenance of conventional dendritic cell (cDC) functions in the steady state. MARCH-I-deficient cDCs accumulated MHC II and B7-2 and exhibited low Ag-presenting ability for exogenous Ags and low cytokine-producing ability upon stimulation in vivo. Importantly, MHC II, but not B7-2, was required for impaired cDC function induced by loss of MARCH-I in vivo. Moreover, MHC II knockin mice whose MHC II was not ubiquitinated showed dysfunction of cDC similar to that of MARCH-I knockout mice. These results suggest that the accumulation of MHC II resulting from loss of ubiquitination caused cDC abnormality; therefore, MARCH-I may function as a housekeeper of cDC in the steady state.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations69
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of ImmunologySame topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207