Juvenile and adult expression of polyglutamine expanded huntingtin produce distinct aggregate distributions in <i>Drosophila</i> muscle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While Huntington's disease (HD) is widely recognized as a disease affecting the nervous system, much evidence has accumulated to suggest peripheral or non-neuronal tissues are affected as well. Here, we utilize the UAS/GAL4 system to express a pathogenic HD construct in the muscle of the fly and characterize the effects. We observe detrimental phenotypes such as a reduced lifespan, decreased locomotion and accumulation of protein aggregates. Strikingly, depending on the GAL4 driver used to express the construct, we saw different aggregate distributions and severity of phenotypes. These different aggregate distributions were found to be dependent on the expression level and the timing of expression. Hsp70, a well-documented suppressor of polyglutamine aggregates, was found to strongly reduce the accumulation of aggregates in the eye, but in the muscle, it did not prevent the reduction of the lifespan. Therefore, the molecular mechanisms underlying the detrimental effects of aggregates in the muscle are distinct from the nervous system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".