MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2214302084 · doi:10.1007/978-1-60327-333-6_8

Regulation of Dopamine Receptor Trafficking and Responsiveness

2009· book-chapter· en· W2214302084 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa L. Perreault, Vaneeta Verma, Brian F. O’Dowd, Susan R. George

Bibliographic record

VenueHumana Press eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReceptorDopamineDopamine receptorCell biologyEndocytic cycleBiologyD1-like receptorG protein-coupled receptorDopamine receptor D25-HT5A receptorDopamine receptor D1NeuroscienceSignal transductionEndocytosisBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The magnitude of cellular responses resulting from dopamine receptor activation is highly dependent on the balance between exocytic and endocytic trafficking pathways, which together, influence the level of receptor expression at the cell surface. Over the past decade, it has been revealed that the mechanisms involved in dopamine receptor transport are extremely complex, involving numerous protein–protein interactions that assist in targeting the receptors to distinct intracellular compartments. In addition, the importance of oligomerization in dopamine receptor trafficking is becoming increasingly evident, providing new perspectives on the mechanisms of receptor transport. This chapter will review the recent advances that have contributed to the understanding of the molecular mechanisms involved in dopamine receptor trafficking, their role in cellular responsiveness and discuss briefly the significance of receptor trafficking in health and disease.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumana Press eBooksSame topicReceptor Mechanisms and SignalingFrench-language works237,207