MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409580788 · doi:10.1038/srep14722

Cdh2 stabilizes FGFR1 and contributes to primed-state pluripotency in mouse epiblast stem cells

2015· article· en· W2409580788 on OpenAlexaff
Toshiyuki Takehara, Takeshi Teramura, Yuta Onodera, John P. Frampton, Kanji Fukuda

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceRIKENKindai University
KeywordsRex1BiologyEmbryonic stem cellCell biologyInduced pluripotent stem cellCell potencyMolecular biologyStem cellEpiblastGene knockdownGeneGeneticsGastrulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cell adhesion molecule Cadherin 2 (Cdh2) plays important roles in somatic cell adhesion, proliferation and migration. Cdh2 is also highly expressed in mouse epiblast stem cells (mEpiSCs), but its function in these cells is unknown. To understand the function of Cdh2 in mEpiSCs, we compared the expression of pluripotency-related genes in mEpiSCs and mouse embryonic stem cells (mESCs) after either Cdh2 knockdown or Cdh2 over-expression. Introduction of specific siRNA against Cdh2 led to attenuation of pluripotency-related genes. Pluripotent gene expression was not recovered by over-expression of Cdh1 following Cdh2 knockdown. Western blot analysis and co-immunoprecipitation assays revealed that Cdh2 stabilizes FGFR1 in mEpiSCs. Furthermore, stable transfection of mESCs with Cdh2 cDNA followed by FGF2 supplementation accelerated cell differentiation. Thus, Cdh2 contributes to the establishment and maintenance of FGF signaling-dependent self-renewal in mEpiSCs through stabilization of FGFR1.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 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

Citations22
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchFrench-language works237,207