MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2239802822 · doi:10.1091/mbc.e15-06-0383

Modeling the roles of protein kinase Cβ and η in single-cell wound repair

2015· article· en· W2239802822 on OpenAlexaff
William R. Holmes, Laura E. Liao, William M. Bement, Leah Edelstein‐Keshet

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology of the Cell · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCellular Mechanics and Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNational Institute of General Medical Sciences
KeywordsCDC42BiologyCell biologyProtein kinase CGTPaseXenopusKinaseRAC1ActinSmall GTPaseMyosinPAK1Signal transductionBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wounded cells such as Xenopus oocytes respond to damage by assembly and closure of an array of actin filaments and myosin-2 controlled by Rho GTPases, including Rho and Cdc42. Rho and Cdc42 are patterned around wounds in a characteristic manner, with active Rho concentrating in a ring-like zone inside a larger, ring-like zone of active Cdc42. How this patterning is achieved is unknown, but Rho and Cdc42 at wounds are subject to regulation by other proteins, including the protein kinases C. Specifically, Cdc42 and Rho activity are enhanced by PKCβ and inhibited by PKCη. We adapt a mathematical model of Simon and coworkers to probe the possible roles of these kinases. We show that PKCβ likely affects the magnitude of positive Rho-Abr feedback, whereas PKCη acts on Cdc42 inactivation. The model explains both qualitative and some overall quantitative features of PKC-Rho GTPase regulation. It also accounts for the previous, peculiar observation that ∼ 20% of cells overexpressing PKCη display zone inversions--that is, displacement of active Rho to the outside of the active Cdc42.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations19
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology of the CellSame topicCellular Mechanics and InteractionsFrench-language works237,207