MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611155373 · doi:10.1139/bcb-2016-0210

<i>TLR2</i> affects <i>CD86</i> expression and inflammatory response in burn injury mice through regulation of <i>p38</i>

2017· article· en· W2611155373 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Li Li, Gang Xu, Chenwang Duan

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry and Cell Biology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Response and Inflammation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTLR2AgonistCD86TUNEL assayWestern blotp38 mitogen-activated protein kinasesTumor necrosis factor alphaInflammationChemistryApoptosisSignal transductionPharmacologyBiologyImmunologyReceptorCell biologyTLR4BiochemistryMAPK/ERK pathwayImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

) mice were obtained, and a mouse burn injury model was constructed. Tissue samples were examined with hematoxylin and eosin staining and the transferase mediated nick end labeling (TUNEL) method. Macrophages were treated with TLR2 agonist and p38 inhibitor. The expression levels of TLR2, p38, CD86, IL-1β, and TNF-α were quantified by RT-qPCR, Western blot, and ELISA. When compared with the sham group, the burn group had a significantly higher rate of apoptosis as well as higher expressions of TLR2, p38, CD86, IL-1β, and TNF-α. Inhibiting TLR2 was shown to significantly reduce the expressions of p-p38, CD86, IL-1β, and TNF-α. In the results of in-vitro experiments, TLR2 agonist increased the expression of p-p38, CD86, IL-1β, and TNF-α, whereas a p38 inhibitor was shown to reduce the expression of CD86, IL-1β, and TNF-α. Our results suggest that the TLR2-p38-CD86 signaling pathway plays a vital role in inflammation associated with burn injury.

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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemistry and Cell BiologySame topicImmune Response and InflammationFrench-language works237,207