MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gene expression profile of allergen-experienced group 2 innate lymphoid cells (HYP2P.323)

2015· article· en· W4313386063 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Mathae, Itziar Martínez-González, Fumio Takei

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicIL-33, ST2, and ILC Pathways
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaTerry Fox Research InstituteBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInnate lymphoid cellAllergenImmunologyBiologyImmunoglobulin EAllergic inflammationChemokineInflammationReceptorInnate immune systemAllergyImmune systemAntibodyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We previously identified group 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2s) in mouse lungs. Upon allergen encounter, they produce type 2 cytokines and mediate T cell-independent allergic lung inflammation and also promote Th2 responses. We have recently found that allergen-treatments of mice result in significant increase in the number of ILC2s in the lung and lymph node even after the resolution of inflammation for several weeks. The allergen-experienced ILC2s are more responsive to unrelated allergens than naive ILC2s and rapidly induce allergic lung inflammation. To characterize the allergen-experienced ILC2s, we have performed microarray analysis of ILC2s purified from naïve mice and allergen-treated mice 4 days, 2 weeks, and 4 months after the treatment. The genes that are differentially expressed at different time points include those encoding chemokines, cytokines and their receptors, cell cycle and proliferation related proteins, adhesion molecules, and transcription factors. Gene Set Enrichment Analyses of the ILC2 populations revealed that allergen-experienced ILC2s are enriched for the gene signature of memory T cells. These results suggest that activated ILC2s undergo cell intrinsic changes and acquire memory-like features that are governed by the same set of genes as those responsible for memory T cell differentiation.

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)0.001
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of ImmunologySame topicIL-33, ST2, and ILC PathwaysFrench-language works237,207