MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2781528910 · doi:10.1042/bst20170102

Evolution of tools and methods for monitoring autophagic flux in mammalian cells

2018· review· en· W2781528910 on OpenAlexafffund
Kevin Yang, Paalini Sathiyaseelan, Cally J. Ho, Sharon M. Gorski

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemical Society Transactions · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutophagy in Disease and Therapy
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreSimon Fraser UniversityBC Cancer Agency
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAutophagyFlux (metallurgy)Cell biologyComputational biologyBiologyChemistryComputer scienceBiological systemBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autophagy is an evolutionarily conserved lysosome-mediated degradation and recycling process, which functions in cellular homeostasis and stress adaptation. The process is highly dynamic and involves autophagosome synthesis, cargo recognition and transport, autophagosome-lysosome fusion, and cargo degradation. The multistep nature of autophagy makes it challenging to quantify, and it is important to consider not only the number of autophagosomes within a cell but also the autophagic degradative activity. The rate at which cargos are recognized, segregated, and degraded through the autophagy pathway is defined as autophagic flux. In practice, methods to measure autophagic flux typically evaluate the lysosome-mediated cargo degradation step by leveraging known autophagy markers such as MAP1LC3B (microtubule-associated proteins 1A/1B light chain 3 beta) or lysosome-dependent fluorescent agents. In this review, we summarize the tools and methods used in mammalian cultured cells pertaining to these two approaches, and highlight innovations that have led to their evolution in recent years. We also discuss the potential limitations of these approaches and recommend using a combination of strategies and multiple different autophagy markers to reliably evaluate autophagic flux in mammalian cells.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.916

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations40
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemical Society TransactionsSame topicAutophagy in Disease and TherapyFrench-language works237,207