MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2173798087 · doi:10.1152/ajpgi.2000.279.1.g148

Pancreatic CCK<sub>B</sub>receptors: their potential roles in somatostatin release and δ-cell proliferation

2000· article· en· W2173798087 on OpenAlexaff
Jean Morisset, Helen Wong, John H. Walsh, Jean Lainé, Judith Bourassa

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCholecystokininPancreasCholecystokinin receptorDelta cellEndocrinologyReceptorInternal medicineBiologySomatostatinIsletGastrinEnteroendocrine cellSomatostatin receptor 3Pancreatic isletsSomatostatin receptor 2SecretionSomatostatin receptorEndocrine systemHormoneInsulinMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In rodents, cholecystokinin (CCK) induces pancreatic enzyme secretion and pancreas growth through its CCK(A) receptors. It is unknown whether occupation of the CCK(B) receptors present in pig and human pancreas can cause the same effects. This study evaluates CCK(B) receptor expression in rat, mouse, pig, and fetal human pancreata using Northern blot, Western blot, and immunofluorescence techniques. The reported 2.7-kb CCK(B) receptor mRNA transcript in the rat brain and gastric fundus is absent in pancreas; the message was, however, detected by RT-PCR and by a CCK(B) receptor antibody as an 80-kDa protein present uniquely in islet delta-cells. Proteins of 50 and 80 kDa appear in mouse pancreas, and proteins of 50 and 115 kDa appear in pig and human pancreas, respectively, all localized in islet delta-cells. Gastrin mRNAs are strongly present in fetal rat pancreas, and the hormone is localized in islets; both are repressed 10 days after birth. In conclusion, the CCK(B) receptors are present in pancreas of four species with exclusive location in islet delta-cells. In such a location, they could be indirectly involved in the control of enzyme secretion.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.862
Threshold uncertainty score0.838

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

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

Citations38
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Gastrointestinal and Liver PhysiologySame topicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207