MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507645692 · doi:10.1038/srep31951

Distinguishing autocrine and paracrine signals in hematopoietic stem cell culture using a biofunctional microcavity platform

2016· article· en· W2507645692 on OpenAlexaff
Eike Müller, Weijia Wang, Wenlian Qiao, Martin Bornhäuser, Peter W. Zandstra, Carsten Werner

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversität LeipzigDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsParacrine signallingAutocrine signallingHaematopoiesisStem cellCell biologyAdmirationBiologyCell culturePsychologyReceptorGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Homeostasis of hematopoietic stem cells (HSC) in the mammalian bone marrow stem cell niche is regulated by signals of the local microenvironment. Besides juxtacrine, endocrine and metabolic cues, paracrine and autocrine signals are involved in controlling quiescence, proliferation and differentiation of HSC with strong implications on expansion and differentiation ex vivo as well as in vivo transplantation. Towards this aim, a cell culture analysis on a polymer microcavity carrier platform was combined with a partial least square analysis of a mechanistic model of cell proliferation. We could demonstrate the discrimination of specific autocrine and paracrine signals from soluble factors as stimulating and inhibitory effectors in hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell culture. From that we hypothesize autocrine signals to be predominantly involved in maintaining the quiescent state of HSC in single-cell niches and advocate our analysis platform as an unprecedented option for untangling convoluted signaling mechanisms in complex cell systems being it of juxtacrine, paracrine or autocrine origin.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.463

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 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

Citations40
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topic3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207