MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3106468124 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-76272-2

Lateral diffusion of CD14 and TLR2 in macrophage plasma membrane assessed by raster image correlation spectroscopy and single particle tracking

2020· article· en· W3106468124 on OpenAlexafffund
Sara Makaremi, Markus Rose, Suman Ranjit, Michelle A. Digman, Dawn M. E. Bowdish, Jose Moran‐Mirabal

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLipid Membrane Structure and Behavior
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of General Medical SciencesOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsTracking (education)Particle (ecology)Raster graphicsDiffusionCD14MacrophageMembraneParticle filterComputer scienceMaterials scienceBiologyChemistryComputer visionPhysicsImmunologyBiochemistryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The diffusion of membrane receptors is central to many biological processes, such as signal transduction, molecule translocation, and ion transport, among others; consequently, several advanced fluorescence microscopy techniques have been developed to measure membrane receptor mobility within live cells. The membrane-anchored receptor cluster of differentiation 14 (CD14) and the transmembrane toll-like receptor 2 (TLR2) are important receptors in the plasma membrane of macrophages that activate the intracellular signaling cascade in response to pathogenic stimuli. The aim of the present work was to compare the diffusion coefficients of CD14 and TLR2 on the apical and basal membranes of macrophages using two fluorescence-based methods: raster image correlation spectroscopy (RICS) and single particle tracking (SPT). In the basal membrane, the diffusion coefficients obtained from SPT and RICS were found to be comparable and revealed significantly faster diffusion of CD14 compared with TLR2. In addition, RICS showed that the diffusion of both receptors was significantly faster in the apical membrane than in the basal membrane, suggesting diffusion hindrance by the adhesion of the cells to the substrate. This finding highlights the importance of selecting the appropriate membrane (i.e., basal or apical) and corresponding method when measuring receptor diffusion in live cells. Accurately knowing the diffusion coefficient of two macrophage receptors involved in the response to pathogen insults will facilitate the study of changes that occur in signaling in these cells as a result of aging and disease.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicLipid Membrane Structure and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207