MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2464788944 · doi:10.7554/elife.15258

The E3 ligase Ubr3 regulates Usher syndrome and MYH9 disorder proteins in the auditory organs of Drosophila and mammals

2016· article· en· W2464788944 on OpenAlexaff
Tongchao Li, Νικόλαος Γιαγτζόγλου, Daniel F. Eberl, Sonal Nagarkar-Jaiswal, Tiantian Cai, Dorothea Godt, Andrew K. Groves, Hugo J. Bellen

Bibliographic record

VenueeLife · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication DisordersNational Institutes of HealthHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsMyosinBiologyPhenocopyUbiquitin ligaseCell biologyGeneticsUsher syndromeDrosophila melanogasterUbiquitinGeneMutantRetinitis pigmentosa

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Myosins play essential roles in the development and function of auditory organs and multiple myosin genes are associated with hereditary forms of deafness. Using a forward genetic screen in Drosophila, we identified an E3 ligase, Ubr3, as an essential gene for auditory organ development. Ubr3 negatively regulates the mono-ubiquitination of non-muscle Myosin II, a protein associated with hearing loss in humans. The mono-ubiquitination of Myosin II promotes its physical interaction with Myosin VIIa, a protein responsible for Usher syndrome type IB. We show that ubr3 mutants phenocopy pathogenic variants of Myosin II and that Ubr3 interacts genetically and physically with three Usher syndrome proteins. The interactions between Myosin VIIa and Myosin IIa are conserved in the mammalian cochlea and in human retinal pigment epithelium cells. Our work reveals a novel mechanism that regulates protein complexes affected in two forms of syndromic deafness and suggests a molecular function for Myosin IIa in auditory organs.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeLifeSame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207