MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134314585 · doi:10.1242/dev.189258

Extensive crosstalk of G protein-coupled receptors with the Hedgehog signalling pathway

2021· article· en· W3134314585 on OpenAlexafffund
Farah Saad, David R. Hipfner

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHedgehog Signaling Pathway Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalMontreal Clinical Research Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBiologyCrosstalkHedgehog signaling pathwaySignallingHedgehogCell biologyReceptorSignal transductionComputational biologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hedgehog (Hh) ligands orchestrate tissue patterning and growth by acting as morphogens, dictating different cellular responses depending on ligand concentration. Cellular sensitivity to Hh ligands is influenced by heterotrimeric G protein activity, which controls production of the second messenger 3',5'-cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP). cAMP in turn activates Protein kinase A (PKA), which functions as an inhibitor and (uniquely in Drosophila) as an activator of Hh signalling. A few mammalian Gαi- and Gαs-coupled G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have been shown to influence Sonic hedgehog (Shh) responses in this way. To determine whether this is a more-general phenomenon, we carried out an RNAi screen targeting GPCRs in Drosophila. RNAi-mediated depletion of more than 40% of GPCRs tested either decreased or increased Hh responsiveness in the developing Drosophila wing, closely matching the effects of Gαs and Gαi depletion, respectively. Genetic analysis indicated that the orphan GPCR Mthl5 lowers cAMP levels to attenuate Hh responsiveness. Our results identify Mthl5 as a new Hh signalling pathway modulator in Drosophila and suggest that many GPCRs may crosstalk with the Hh pathway in mammals.

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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmentSame topicHedgehog Signaling Pathway StudiesFrench-language works237,207