Orphan nuclear receptor regulation of reproduction.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Orphan nuclear receptors, those without known ligands, were discovered because of their structural similarity to the ligand-driven steroid and thyroid receptors. Since their characterization, many of the orphan receptors have been adopted, i.e., ligands, usually lipids or derived lipids, have been discovered. The orphan receptors are transcriptional regulators, functioning in the reproductive context to upregulate or suppress gene expression. By this means, the orphan receptors regulate a plethora of reproductive events. In the majority of cases, the effects are stimulatory, indeed, members of the NR2 family promote Leydig cell differentiation and testicular steroidogenesis, while those of the NR4 family regulate early gestation and placental formation. The NR5 family has two members, steroidogenic factor-1 (SF-1, NR5A1) and liver receptor homolog-1 (LRH-1, NR5A2). These receptors interact with the same DNA sequence and are believed to be constitutive transcription factors. Their effects are modulated by the repressive effects of the NR0 family of orphan receptors that comprise the short heterodimeric partner (SHP, NR0B2) and dosagesensitive sex reversal adrenal hypoplasia congenital region on the X chromosome, gene 1 (DAX1, NROB1). SHP and DAX1 inhibit the interaction of LRH-1 and SF-1 with coactivators, thereby reducing their constitutive transcriptional effects. Overall, the orphan nuclear receptors are essential regulators of reproductive function in mammals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".