Th2 Differentiation Is Unaffected by Jagged2 Expression on Dendritic Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Expression of the Jagged Notch ligands by dendritic cells (DCs) has been suggested to play a role in instructing Th2 responses. Supporting this hypothesis, we found that Jagged2 but not Jagged1 expression, correlates with the ability of DCs to induce Th2 responses. Jagged2 expression is up-regulated in response to the helminth soluble Schistosoma mansoni egg Ag, which conditions DCs to induce Th2 responses, and is markedly down-regulated following exposure to TLR agonists that generally promote Th1 responses. Conversely, Jagged1 expression is markedly induced by TLR ligation. Despite these correlations, suppression of expression of Jagged2 using retrovirally delivered small interfering RNA failed to affect the ability of DCs to induce Th2 cell differentiation either in vitro or in vivo. Moreover, retrovirally induced expression of Jagged2 did not enhance the ability of DCs to induce Th2 cell responses. Our data indicate that Jagged2 expression by DCs is not sufficient or required for Th2 cell differentiation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".