MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034423638 · doi:10.3389/fcell.2020.00480

Mitochondrial Function in Muscle Stem Cell Fates

2020· review· en· W3034423638 on OpenAlexafffund
Debasmita Bhattacharya, Anthony Scimè

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCell biologyMitochondrionStem cellBiologyCell fate determinationOxidative phosphorylationRegeneration (biology)Function (biology)OrganelleEpigeneticsBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mitochondria are crucial organelles that control cellular metabolism through an integrated mechanism of energy generation via oxidative phosphorylation. Apart from this canonical role, it is also integral for ROS production, fatty acid metabolism and epigenetic remodeling. Recently, a role for the mitochondria in effecting stem cell fate decisions has gained considerable interest. This is important for skeletal muscle, which exhibits a remarkable property for regeneration following injury, owing to satellite cells (SCs), the adult myogenic stem cells. Mitochondrial function is associated with maintaining and dictating SC fates, linked to metabolic programming during quiescence, activation, self-renewal, proliferation and differentiation. Notably, mitochondrial adaptation might take place to alter SC fates and function in the presence of different environmental cues. This review dissects the contribution of mitochondria to SC operational outcomes, focusing on how their content, function, dynamics and adaptability work to influence SC fate decisions.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 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

Citations88
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Cell and Developmental BiologySame topicMuscle Physiology and DisordersFrench-language works237,207