MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092551716 · doi:10.1002/jcp.30106

Zebrafish <i>hhatla</i> is involved in cardiac hypertrophy

2020· article· en· W3092551716 on OpenAlexafffund
Xingjuan Shi, Yu Zhang, Yijie Gong, Mengying Chen, Koroboshka Brand‐Arzamendi, Xiangdong Liu, Xiao‐Yan Wen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cellular Physiology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsZebrafishMuscle hypertrophyCalcineurinInternal medicineHeart failureHypertrophic cardiomyopathyBiologyEndoplasmic reticulumHedgehog signaling pathwayCardiac hypertrophyCell biologyEndocrinologySignal transductionMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiac hypertrophy is a compensatory response to pathological stimuli, ultimately progresses to cardiomyopathy, heart failure, or sudden death. Although many signaling pathways have been reported to be involved in the hypertrophic process, it is still not fully clear about the underlying molecular mechanisms for cardiac hypertrophy. Hedgehog acyltransferase-like (Hhatl), a sarcoplasmic reticulum-resident protein, exhibits high expression in the heart and muscle. However, the biological role of Hhatl in the heart remains unknown. In this study, we first found that the expression level of Hhatl is markedly decreased in cardiac hypertrophy. We further studied the role of hhatla, homolog of Hhatl with the zebrafish model. The depletion of hhatla in zebrafish leads to cardiac defects, as well as an enhanced level of hypertrophic markers. Besides, we found that calcineurin signaling participates in hhatla depletion-induced cardiac hypertrophy. Together, these results demonstrate a critical role for hhatla in cardiac hypertrophy.

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 score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cellular PhysiologySame topicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207