MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413675899 · doi:10.1101/2025.08.24.671450

Paralog-specific intrabodies for PSD-93 and SAP102 expand the molecular toolkit to resolve excitatory synapse organization

2025· preprint· en· W4413675899 on OpenAlexaff
Christelle Breillat, Ellyn Renou, Manon Darribere, Charlotte Rimbault, Vincent Talenton, Agathe Ecoutin, Sophie Daburon, Christel Poujol, Daniel Choquet, Cameron D. Mackereth, Matthieu Sainlos

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLipid Membrane Structure and Behavior
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nautical Research Society
FundersLabEx BRAINCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsExcitatory postsynaptic potentialSynapseBiologyNeuroscienceInhibitory postsynaptic potential

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT A scarcity of live, paralog-specific tools has limited analysis of PSD-MAGUKs at excitatory synapses. To address this gap, we engineered small, 10 FN3-derived binders that selectively recognize PSD-93 and SAP102 -alongside an enhanced PSD-95 reagent- and converted them into regulated, gene-encoded intrabodies for endogenous imaging. Through sequence-guided selection and targeted optimization, we obtained high-specificity reagents that label their native targets in neurons with minimal perturbation and support multiplexed live-cell and advanced imaging modalities. This toolkit enables differential visualization of MAGUK paralogs at native levels and provides a practical route to dissect their distinct contributions to synapse organization and plasticity.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicLipid Membrane Structure and Behavior→French-language works237,207→