MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126210722 · doi:10.14814/phy2.14717

Localization of Claudin‐3 and Claudin‐4 within the Small Intestine of newborn piglets

2021· article· en· W3126210722 on OpenAlexaff
Brodie Deluco, Kezia R. Fourie, Olena M. Simko, Heather L. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBarrier Structure and Function Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfectious disease (medical specialty)VirologyMedicineDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Piglets must acquire passive immunity through colostrum within hours after birth to survive. How colostral macromolecules traverse the small intestinal epithelium may include nonselective pinocytosis and paracellular transport through tight junction proteins located between epithelial cells. Claudin proteins-3 and -4 contribute to the epithelial tight junctions (TJs) on the apical aspect of lateral surfaces of intestinal epithelial cells (IECs) where they help regulate ion and macromolecule movement across the intestinal epithelium. Throughout the small intestine of newborn piglets, Claudin-3 was localized to the lateral and basolateral surface of intestinal epithelial cells as well as the membrane of large vacuoles. In the duodenum and jejunum, Claudin-4 was localized to the apical surface independent of tight junction regions. In the ileum, Claudin-4 was localized to the lateral and basolateral surfaces indicating region-specific differences and noncanonical patterns of Claudin-4 localization independent of tight junction regions. Understanding the timing of changes in surface localization of Claudin-3 and Claudin-4 and how they may coincide with changes in small intestinal permeability may help develop new protective strategies against infectious diseases within newborn piglets.

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)0.004
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 score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiological ReportsSame topicBarrier Structure and Function StudiesFrench-language works237,207