MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587354049 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2017.01.029

The Mitochondrial Rhomboid Protease PARL Is Regulated by PDK2 to Integrate Mitochondrial Quality Control and Metabolism

2017· article· en· W2587354049 on OpenAlexafffund
Guang Shi, G. Angus McQuibban

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMitochondrial Function and Pathology
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research
KeywordsMitophagyPINK1ParkinCell biologyBiologyMitochondrionRegulatorMitochondrial DNAmitochondrial fusionBiochemistryGeneAutophagyParkinson's diseaseDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mitochondrial quality control (MQC) systems are essential for mitochondrial health and normal cellular function. Dysfunction of MQC is emerging as a central mechanism for the pathogenesis of various diseases, including Parkinson's disease. The mammalian mitochondrial rhomboid protease, PARL, has been proposed as a regulator of PINK1/PARKIN-mediated mitophagy, which is an essential component of MQC. PARL undergoes an N-terminal autocatalytic cleavage (β cleavage), which is required for efficient mitophagy. We demonstrate that β cleavage responds to mitochondrial stress, triggered by the depletion of mitochondrial ATP. Furthermore, we show that PDK2, a key regulator in metabolic plasticity, phosphorylates PARL and regulates β cleavage. Through regulating β cleavage and the production of a less active enzyme, PACT, PDK2 negatively regulates PINK1/PARKIN-mediated mitophagy. Taken together, we propose that PDK2/PARL senses defects in mitochondrial bioenergetics, integrating mitochondrial metabolism to mitophagy and MQC in human health and disease.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.521
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations91
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicMitochondrial Function and PathologyFrench-language works237,207