Olfactory receptors contribute to progression of kidney fibrosis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Olfactory receptors (ORs) which are mainly known as odor-sensors in the olfactory epithelium are shown to be expressed in several non-sensory tissues. Despite the specified role of some of these receptors in normal physiology of the kidney, little is known about their potential effect in renal disorders. In this study, using the holistic view of systems biology, it was determined that ORs are significantly changed during the progression of kidney fibrosis. For further validation, common differentially expressed ORs resulted from reanalysis of two time-course microarray datasets were selected for experimental evaluation in a validated murine model of unilateral ureteral obstruction (UUO). Transcriptional analysis by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction demonstrated considerable changes in the expression pattern of Olfr433, Olfr129, Olfr1393, Olfr161, and Olfr622 during the progression of kidney fibrosis. For localization of these ORs, single-cell RNA-sequencing datasets of normal and UUO mice were reanalyzed. Results showed that Olfr433 is highly expressed in macrophages in day-2 and 7 post-injury in UUO mice and not in normal subgroups. Besides, like previous findings, Olfr1393 was shown to be expressed prominently in the proximal tubular cells of the kidney. In conclusion, our combinatorial temporal approach to the underlying mechanisms of chronic kidney disease highlighted the potential role of ORs in progression of fibrosis. The expression of Olfr433 in the macrophages provides some clue about its relation to molecular mechanisms promoted in the fibrotic kidney. The proposed ORs in this study could be the subject of further functional assessments in the future.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it