MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2563543908 · doi:10.1111/dgd.12334

Mechanistic aspects of mammalian cell size control

2016· review· en· W2563543908 on OpenAlexaff
Kazuo Yamamoto, Tak W. Mak

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment Growth & Differentiation · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsBiologyGene knockdownCell biologyCellTranslation (biology)In vivoCell cultureMitochondrionDownregulation and upregulationCell growthCell sizePhenotypeMessenger RNATransgeneGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Size distribution in a group of differentiated cells often falls into a constant range. However, in vitro and in vivo studies have shown that cells can temporarily change their size in response to their surrounding environment and the stimuli they receive. Thus, there must be a mechanism that normally keeps cell size constant while allowing a shift to an alternative size when necessary. To investigate the molecular basis of mammalian cell size control, we conducted a genetic screen in a human T cell line to identify genes involved in cell size regulation. A prime candidate emerging from this screen increases cell size when it is overexpressed but reduces cell size when subjected to siRNA knockdown. Several lines of evidence indicate that the product of this gene, which we called "Largen", regulates mRNA translation in a manner associated with the upregulation of a specific subset of mRNAs, many of which affect mitochondrial function. In fact, cells overexpressing Largen increase both mitochondrial mass and activity, enhancing ATP production. These in vitro observations have been replicated in vivo using transgenic mouse models. With a focus on these findings, we discuss the possible contribution of mitochondria to the control of mammalian cell size.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopment Growth & DifferentiationSame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207