MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793967558 · doi:10.1016/j.stemcr.2018.02.007

KLF4 Nuclear Export Requires ERK Activation and Initiates Exit from Naive Pluripotency

2018· article· en· W2793967558 on OpenAlexafffund
Navroop K. Dhaliwal, Kamelia Miri, Scott Davidson, Hala Tamim El Jarkass, Jennifer A. Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueStem Cell Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicKruppel-like factors research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsBiologyKLF4MAPK/ERK pathwayCell biologyNuclear export signalSOX2GeneticsKinaseCell nucleusGeneTranscription factor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cooperative action of a transcription factor complex containing OCT4, SOX2, NANOG, and KLF4 maintains the naive pluripotent state; however, less is known about the mechanisms that disrupt this complex, initiating exit from pluripotency. We show that, as embryonic stem cells (ESCs) exit pluripotency, KLF4 protein is exported from the nucleus causing rapid decline in Nanog and Klf4 transcription; as a result, KLF4 is the first pluripotency transcription factor removed from transcription-associated complexes during differentiation. KLF4 nuclear export requires ERK activation, and phosphorylation of KLF4 by ERK initiates interaction of KLF4 with nuclear export factor XPO1, leading to KLF4 export. Mutation of the ERK phosphorylation site in KLF4 (S132) blocks KLF4 nuclear export, the decline in Nanog, Klf4, and Sox2 mRNA, and differentiation. These findings demonstrate that relocalization of KLF4 to the cytoplasm is a critical first step in exit from the naive pluripotent state and initiation of ESC differentiation.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations57
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStem Cell ReportsSame topicKruppel-like factors researchFrench-language works237,207