CD5 levels reveal distinct basal T‐cell receptor signals in T cells from non‐obese diabetic mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Type 1 diabetes in non‐obese diabetic (NOD) mice occurs when autoreactive T cells eliminate insulin producing pancreatic β cells. While extensively studied in T‐cell receptor (TCR) transgenic mice, the contribution of alterations in thymic selection to the polyclonal T‐cell pool in NOD mice is not yet resolved. The magnitude of signals downstream of TCR engagement with self‐peptide directs the development of a functional T‐cell pool, in part by ensuring tolerance to self. TCR interactions with self‐peptide are also necessary for T‐cell homeostasis in the peripheral lymphoid organs. To identify differences in TCR signal strength that accompany thymic selection and peripheral T‐cell maintenance, we compared CD5 levels, a marker of basal TCR signal strength, on immature and mature T cells from autoimmune diabetes‐prone NOD and ‐resistant B6 mice. The data suggest that there is no preferential selection of NOD thymocytes that perceive stronger TCR signals from self‐peptide engagement. Instead, NOD mice have an MHC‐dependent increase in CD4 + thymocytes and mature T cells that express lower levels of CD5. In contrast, T cell‐intrinsic mechanisms lead to higher levels of CD5 on peripheral CD8 + T cells from NOD relative to B6 mice, suggesting that peripheral CD8 + T cells with higher basal TCR signals may have survival advantages in NOD mice. These differences in the T‐cell pool in NOD mice may contribute to the development or progression of autoimmune diabetes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".