Bleomycin-induced pulmonary fibrosis susceptibility genes in AcB/BcA recombinant congenic mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The genetic basis of susceptibility to pulmonary fibrosis is largely unknown. Initially, in this study, loci regulating the response of bleomycin-induced pulmonary fibrosis were mapped using a set of recombinant congenic strains bred from pulmonary fibrosis-resistant A/J and susceptible C57BL/6J (B6) mice. Linkage was identified (logarithm of the odds score = 4.9) on chromosome 9, and other suggestive loci were detected. The putative loci included alleles from both the B6 and A/J strains as increasing the fibrosis response of congenic mice. Gene expression analysis with microarrays revealed 3,304 genes or expressed sequence tags to be differentially expressed (P < 0.01) in lung tissue between bleomycin-treated B6 and A/J mice, and 246 of these genes mapped to potential susceptibility loci. Pulmonary genes differentially expressed between bleomycin-treated B6 and A/J mice included those of heparin binding and extracellular matrix deposition pathways. A review of available genomic sequences revealed 809 (43% of total) genes in the linkage intervals to have variations predicted to alter the encoded proteins or their regulation, 68 (8.4%) of which were also differentially expressed. Genomic approaches were combined to produce a set of candidate genes that may influence susceptibility to bleomycin-induced pulmonary fibrosis in the A/J:B6 mouse model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".