MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909313209 · doi:10.1111/gtc.12668

Cep128 associates with Odf2 to form the subdistal appendage of the centriole

2019· article· en· W2909313209 on OpenAlexaff
Hiroka Kashihara, Shuhei Chiba, Shin‐ichiro Kanno, Koya Suzuki, Tomoki Yano, Sachiko Tsukita

Bibliographic record

VenueGenes to Cells · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and Kidney Cyst Diseases
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Aging
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceCore Research for Evolutional Science and TechnologyTohoku University
KeywordsBiologyCentrioleCentrosomeCell biologyMicrotubuleCiliumAppendageAnatomyCellGeneticsCell cycle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mother centriole in a cell has two appendages, the distal appendage (DA) and subdistal appendage (SDA), which have roles in generating cilia and organizing the cellular microtubular network, respectively. In the knockout (KO) cells of Odf2, the component of the DA and SDA, both appendages simultaneously disappear. However, the molecular mechanisms by which the DA and SDA form independently but close to each other downstream of Odf2 are unknown. Here, using super-resolution structured illumination microscopy (SR-SIM), we found that the signal for GFP-tagged Odf2 overlapped considerably with that of immunofluorescently labeled Cep128. We further found that Cep128 knockdown (KD) caused the dissociation of other SDA components from the centriole, including centriolin, Ndel1, ninein and Cep170, whereas Odf2 was still associated with the centriole. In contrast, the DA components remained associated with the centriole in Cep128 KD cells. Consistent with this observation, we identified Cep128 as an Odf2-interacting protein by immunoprecipitation. Taken with the finding that Cep128 deletion decreased the stability of centriolar microtubules, our results indicate that Cep128 associates with Odf2 in the hierarchical assembly of SDA components to elicit the microtubule-organizing function.

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 score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations32
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenes to CellsSame topicGenetic and Kidney Cyst DiseasesFrench-language works237,207