MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4236206204 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14646831

Analysis of the ENU-3 protein family in nervous system development in C. elegans

2021· preprint· en· W4236206204 on OpenAlexaff
Roxana O. Florica

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNetrinCaenorhabditis elegansAxon guidanceBiologyNervous systemVentral nerve cordCell biologyAxonReceptorNeuroscienceAnatomyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the development of the nervous system, neurons are guided to their final targets by several well-known guidance cues. In Caenorhabditis elegans the expression of the UNC-6/Netrin guidance cue along the ventral cord attracts axons that express UNC-40, while repulsing axons that express both the UNC-5 and UNC-40 receptors. Lack of both UNC-40 and the novel protein ENU-3 enhanced the ventral guidance defects of the AVM and PVM (Yee et al., 2014). This suggests that ENU-3 functions in an UNC-6 dependent pathway parallel to UNC-40 in controlling migrations towards the ventral nerve cord. Mutations in all proteins of the ENU-3 family also enhance the motor neuron axon outgrowth defects of strains lacking UNC-6 or the UNC-5 receptor, thus they function in a parallel unknown pathway (Yee et al., 2011). Expression analyses in HeLa cells have determined that ENU-3 and one of its paralogs, C38D4.1 localize to the nuclear membrane/ER while another of its paralogs, K01G5.3 is an intracellular membrane-associated protein.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms→French-language works237,207→