MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147296371 · doi:10.1161/hh2301.100349

Genetic Manipulation of Cardiac K <sup>+</sup> Channel Function in Mice

2001· review· en· W2147296371 on OpenAlexaff
Jeanne M. Nerbonne, Colin G. Nichols, Thomas L. Schwarz, Denis Escande

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Research · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsHotel Dieu Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtein subunitAutomaticityPotassium channelBiologyCloning (programming)PhenotypeGeneChannel (broadcasting)Cell biologyNeuroscienceGeneticsBiophysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the mammalian myocardium, potassium (K(+)) channels control resting potentials, action potential waveforms, automaticity, and refractory periods and, in most cardiac cells, multiple types of K(+) channels that subserve these functions are expressed. Molecular cloning has revealed the presence of a large number of K(+) channel pore forming (alpha) and accessory (beta) subunits in the heart, and considerable progress has been made recently in defining the relationships between expressed K(+) channel subunits and functional cardiac K(+) channels. To date, more than 20 mouse models with altered K(+) channel expression/functioning have been generated using dominant-negative transgenic and targeted gene deletion approaches. In several instances, the genetic manipulation of K(+) channel subunit expression has revealed the role of specific K(+) channel subunit subfamilies or individual K(+) channel subunit genes in the generation of myocardial K(+) channels. In other cases, however, the phenotypic consequences have been unexpected. This review summarizes what has been learned from the in situ genetic manipulation of cardiac K(+) channel functioning in the mouse, discusses the limitations of the models developed to date, and explores the likely directions of future research.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations225
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation ResearchSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207