MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174502555 · doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2021.06.052

MATR3 F115C knock-in mice do not exhibit motor defects or neuropathological features of ALS

2021· article· nl· W3174502555 on OpenAlexafffund
Rebekah van Bruggen, Katarina Maksimovic, Justin You, David Duc Tran, Hyeok Jun Lee, Mashiat Khan, Ching Serena Kao, Jihye Rachel Kim, Woo In Cho, Xiao Xiao Chen, Jeehye Park

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemical and Biophysical Research Communications · 2021
Typearticle
Languagenl
FieldMedicine
TopicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
FundersHospital for Sick ChildrenCanada Research ChairsScottish Rite Charitable Foundation of CanadaFondation Brain CanadaALS Society of Canada
KeywordsAmyotrophic lateral sclerosisMutantBiologyMutationMolecular biologyGeneticsGeneDiseaseMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The F115C mutation in the MATR3 gene has been linked to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). To determine the pathogenicity of the F115C mutation and the mechanism by which this mutation causes ALS, we generated mice that harbor the F115C mutation in the endogenous murine Matr3 locus. Heterozygous or homozygous MATR3 F115C knock-in mice were viable and did not exhibit motor deficits up to 2 years of age. The mutant mice showed no significant differences in the number of Purkinje cells or motor neurons compared to wild-type littermates. Neuropathological examination revealed an absence of MATR3 and TDP-43 pathology in Purkinje cells and motor neurons in the mutant mice. Together, our results suggest that the F115C mutation in MATR3 may not confer pathogenicity.

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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemical and Biophysical Research CommunicationsSame topicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis ResearchFrench-language works237,207