MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586245389 · doi:10.1038/ncomms13834

Armc5 deletion causes developmental defects and compromises T-cell immune responses

2017· article· en· W2586245389 on OpenAlexafffund
Yan Hu, Linjiang Lao, Jianning Mao, Wei� Jin, Hongyu Luo, Tania Charpentier, Shijie Qi, Junzheng Peng, Bing Hu, Mieczysław Marcinkiewicz, Alain Lamarre, Jiangping Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsKnockout mouseBiologyImmune systemCell growthLymphocytic choriomeningitisInternal medicineT cellEndocrinologyImmunologyCell biologyCancer researchMedicineCD8ReceptorGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Armadillo repeat containing 5 (ARMC5) is a cytosolic protein with no enzymatic activities. Little is known about its function and mechanisms of action, except that gene mutations are associated with risks of primary macronodular adrenal gland hyperplasia. Here we map Armc5 expression by in situ hybridization, and generate Armc5 knockout mice, which are small in body size. Armc5 knockout mice have compromised T-cell proliferation and differentiation into Th1 and Th17 cells, increased T-cell apoptosis, reduced severity of experimental autoimmune encephalitis, and defective immune responses to lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus infection. These mice also develop adrenal gland hyperplasia in old age. Yeast 2-hybrid assays identify 16 ARMC5-binding partners. Together these data indicate that ARMC5 is crucial in fetal development, T-cell function and adrenal gland growth homeostasis, and that the functions of ARMC5 probably depend on interaction with multiple signalling pathways.

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)0.000
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 score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations62
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207