MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163846766 · doi:10.1084/jem.20060474

Differential synergy of Notch and T cell receptor signaling determines αβ versus γδ lineage fate

2006· article· en· W2163846766 on OpenAlexaff
Annette I. Garbe, Andreas Krueger, Fotini Gounari, Juan Carlos Zúñiga‐Pflücker, Harald von Boehmer

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Experimental Medicine · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicT-cell and B-cell Immunology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsNotch signaling pathwayBiologyT-cell receptorLineage (genetic)Cell biologyT cellCell fate determinationCellular differentiationSignal transductionImmunologyGeneticsGeneImmune systemTranscription factor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thymic precursors expressing the pre-T cell receptor (TCR), the gammadeltaTCR, or the alphabetaTCR can all enter the CD4+ 8+ alphabeta lineage, albeit with different efficacy. Here it is shown that proliferation and differentiation of precursors with the different TCRs into alphabeta lineage cells require Notch signaling at the DN3 stage of thymic development. At the DN4 stage, Notch signaling still significantly contributes to the generation of alphabeta T cells. In particular, in alphabeta lineage commitment, the pre-TCR synergizes more efficiently with Notch signals than the other two TCRs, whereas gammadeltaTCR-expressing cells can survive and expand in the absence of Notch signals, even though Notch signaling enhances their proliferation. These observations suggest a new model of alphabeta versus gammadelta lineage choice in which lineage fate is determined by the extent of synergy between TCR and Notch signaling and in which the evolutionarily recent advent of the cell-autonomously signaling pre-TCR increased the efficacy of alphabeta T cell generation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations106
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Experimental MedicineSame topicT-cell and B-cell ImmunologyFrench-language works237,207