MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4302065839 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1803.05377

When few survive to tell the tale: thymus and gonad as auditioning\n organs: historical overview

2018· preprint· W4302065839 on OpenAlexaff
Donald R. Forsdyke

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2018
Typepreprint
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicAdrenal Hormones and Disorders
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGameteGametogenesisGeneGeneticsFunction (biology)Cell biologyImmune systemSpermEmbryogenesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unlike other organs, the thymus and gonads generate non-uniform cell\npopulations, many members of which perish, and a few survive. While it is\nrecognized that thymic cells are 'audited' to optimize an organism's immune\nrepertoire, whether gametogenesis could be orchestrated similarly to favour\nhigh quality gametes is uncertain. Ideally, such quality would be affirmed at\nearly stages before the commitment of extensive parental resources. A case is\nhere made that, along the lines of a previously proposed lymphocyte quality\ncontrol mechanism, gamete quality can be registered indirectly through\ndetection of incompatibilities between proteins encoded by the grandparental\nDNA sequences within the parent from which haploid gametes are meiotically\nderived. This 'stress test' is achieved in the same way that thymic screening\nfor potential immunological incompatibilities is achieved - by 'promiscuous'\nexpression, under the influence of the AIRE protein, of the products of genes\nthat are not normally specific for that organ. Consistent with this, the Aire\ngene is expressed in both thymus and gonads, and AIRE deficiency impedes\nfunction in both organs. While not excluding the subsequent emergence of hybrid\nincompatibilities due to the intermixing of genomic sequences from parents\n(rather than grandparents), many observations, such as the number of proteins\nthat are aberrantly expressed during gametogenesis, can be explained on this\nbasis. Indeed, promiscuous expression could have first evolved in\ngamete-forming cells where incompatible proteins would be manifest as aberrant\nprotein aggregates that cause apoptosis. This mechanism would later have been\nco-opted by thymic epithelial cells which display peptides from aggregates to\nremove potentially autoreactive T cells.\n

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.135 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAdrenal Hormones and DisordersFrench-language works237,207