MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979792120 · doi:10.1002/1873-3468.13637

Hijacking intracellular membranes to feed autophagosomal growth

2019· review· en· W2979792120 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Leopoldo Staiano, Francesca Zappa

Bibliographic record

VenueFEBS Letters · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutophagy in Disease and Therapy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Genetics
KeywordsAutophagosomeAutophagyEndoplasmic reticulumCell biologyGolgi apparatusBiogenesisATG16L1EndosomeIntracellularLysosomeBiologyCytosolOrganelleChemistryBiochemistryApoptosisEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autophagy is widely considered as a housekeeping mechanism that enables cells to survive stress conditions and, in particular, nutrient deprivation. Autophagy begins with the formation of the phagophore that expands and closes around cytosolic material and damaged organelles destined for degradation. The execution of this complex machinery is guaranteed by the coordinated action of more than 40 ATG (autophagy-related) proteins that control the entire process at different stages from the biogenesis of the autophagosome to cargo sequestration and fusion with lysosomes. Autophagosome biogenesis occurs at multiple intracellular sites, such as the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and the plasma membrane. Soon after the formation of the phagophore, the nascent autophagosome progressively grows in size and ultimately closes by recruiting intracellular membranes. In this review, we focus on the contribution of three membrane sources - the ER, the ER-Golgi intermediate compartment, and the Golgi complex - to autophagosome biogenesis and expansion. We also highlight the interplay between the secretory pathway and autophagy in cells when nutrients are scarce.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.278 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEBS LettersSame topicAutophagy in Disease and TherapyFrench-language works237,207