MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2504089353 · doi:10.12688/f1000research.8854.1

Networks of fibers and factors: regulation of capsule formation in Cryptococcus neoformans

2016· preprint· en· W2504089353 on OpenAlexafffund
Hao Ding, François L. Mayer, Eddy Sánchez‐León, Glauber Ribeiro de Sousa Araújo, Susana Frasés, James W. Kronstad

Bibliographic record

VenueF1000Research · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFungal Infections and Studies
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y TecnologíaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsCryptococcus neoformansBiologyCapsuleFungusMeningoencephalitisCryptococcosisImmunologyCell biologyMicrobiologyNeuroscienceBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability of the pathogenic fungus Cryptococcus neoformans to cause life-threatening meningoencephalitis in immunocompromised individuals is due in large part to elaboration of a capsule consisting of polysaccharide fibers. The size of the cell-associated capsule is remarkably responsive to a variety of environmental and host conditions, but the mechanistic details of the regulation, synthesis, trafficking, and attachment of the polysaccharides are poorly understood. Recent studies reveal a complex network of transcription factors that influence capsule elaboration in response to several different signals of relevance to disease (e.g., iron deprivation). The emerging complexity of the network is consistent with the diversity of conditions that influence the capsule and illustrates the responsiveness of the fungus to both the environment and mammalian hosts.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueF1000ResearchSame topicFungal Infections and StudiesFrench-language works237,207