The in Vivo Brain Interactome of the Amyloid Precursor Protein
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite intense research efforts, the physiological function and molecular environment of the amyloid precursor protein has remained enigmatic. Here we describe the application of time-controlled transcardiac perfusion cross-linking, a method for the in vivo mapping of protein interactions in intact tissue, to study the interactome of the amyloid precursor protein (APP). To gain insights into the specificity of reported protein interactions the study was extended to the mammalian amyloid precursor-like proteins (APLP1 and APLP2). To rule out sampling bias as an explanation for differences in the individual datasets, a small scale quantitative iTRAQ (isobaric tags for relative and absolute quantitation)-based comparison of APP, APLP1, and APLP2 interactomes was carried out. An interactome map was derived that confirmed eight previously reported interactions of APP and revealed the identity of more than 30 additional proteins that reside in spatial proximity to APP in the brain. Subsequent validation studies confirmed a physiological interaction between APP and leucine-rich repeat and Ig domain-containing protein 1, demonstrated a strong influence of Ig domain-containing protein 1 on the proteolytic processing of APP, and consolidated similarities in the biology of APP and p75.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it