MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2290132039 · doi:10.4137/lpi.s37190

Membrane Contact Sites: Complex Zones for Membrane Association and Lipid Exchange

2015· review· en· W2290132039 on OpenAlexaff
Evan Quon, Christopher Beh

Bibliographic record

VenueLipid Insights · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLipid Membrane Structure and Behavior
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMembrane contact siteMembraneEndoplasmic reticulumCell biologyPeripheral membrane proteinPlant lipid transfer proteinsVesicleOrganelleMembrane proteinChemistryLipid raftBiological membraneBiologyIntegral membrane proteinBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lipid transport between membranes within cells involves vesicle and protein carriers, but as agents of nonvesicular lipid transfer, the role of membrane contact sites has received increasing attention. As zones for lipid metabolism and exchange, various membrane contact sites mediate direct associations between different organelles. In particular, membrane contact sites linking the plasma membrane (PM) and the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) represent important regulators of lipid and ion transfer. In yeast, cortical ER is stapled to the PM through membrane-tethering proteins, which establish a direct connection between the membranes. In this review, we consider passive and facilitated models for lipid transfer at PM-ER contact sites. Besides the tethering proteins, we examine the roles of an additional repertoire of lipid and protein regulators that prime and propagate PM-ER membrane association. We conclude that instead of being simple mediators of membrane association, regulatory components of membrane contact sites have complex and multilayered functions.

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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.321
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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLipid InsightsSame topicLipid Membrane Structure and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207