MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110275069 · doi:10.1091/mbc.e19-08-0436

Mapping the electrostatic profiles of cellular membranes

2020· article· en· W3110275069 on OpenAlexafffund
Sharon Eisenberg, Ehud Haimov, Glenn F. W. Walpole, Jonathan Plumb, Michael M. Kozlov, Sergio Grinstein

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology of the Cell · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLipid Membrane Structure and Behavior
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsEndoplasmic reticulumGolgi apparatusBiologyMembraneCell biologyMembrane contact sitePeroxisomeOrganelleBiophysicsMitochondrionBiochemistryMembrane proteinGeneIntegral membrane protein

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anionic phospholipids can confer a net negative charge on biological membranes. This surface charge generates an electric field that serves to recruit extrinsic cationic proteins, can alter the disposition of transmembrane proteins and causes the local accumulation of soluble counterions, altering the local pH and the concentration of physiologically important ions such as calcium. Because the phospholipid compositions of the different organellar membranes vary, their surface charges are similarly expected to diverge. Yet, despite the important functional implications, remarkably little is known about the electrostatic properties of the individual organellar membranes. We therefore designed and implemented approaches to estimate the surface charges of the cytosolic membranes of various organelles in situ in intact cells. Our data indicate that the inner leaflet of the plasma membrane is most negative, with a surface potential of approximately -35 mV, followed by the Golgi complex > lysosomes > mitochondria ≈ peroxisomes > endoplasmic reticulum, in decreasing order.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.221
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations49
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology of the CellSame topicLipid Membrane Structure and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207