MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164690176 · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.177.9.6256

Mechanisms of Neonatal Mucosal Antibody Protection

2006· article· en· W2164690176 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicola Harris, I. Spoerri, Jacqueline F. Schopfer, Chiara Nembrini, Patrick Merky, Joanna C. Massacand, Joseph F. Urban, Alain Lamarre, Kurt Bürki, Bernhard Odermatt, Rolf M. Zinkernagel, Andrew J. Macpherson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicInfant Nutrition and Health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University Medical CentreInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyImmunologyAntibodyImmune systemReceptorUterusMicrobiologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following an abrupt transition at birth from the sterile uterus to an environment with abundant commensal and pathogenic microbes, neonatal mammals are protected by maternal Abs at mucosal surfaces. We show in mice that different Ab isotypes work in distinct ways to protect the neonatal mucosal surface. Secretory IgA acts to limit penetration of commensal intestinal bacteria through the neonatal intestinal epithelium: an apparently primitive process that does not require diversification of the primary natural Ab repertoire. In contrast, neonatal protection against the exclusively luminal parasite Heligmosomoides polygyrus required IgG from primed females. This immune IgG could either be delivered directly in milk or retrotransported via neonatal Fc receptor from the neonatal serum into the intestinal lumen to exert its protective effect.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 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

Citations212
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of ImmunologySame topicInfant Nutrition and HealthFrench-language works237,207