MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W45007527 · doi:10.1096/fasebj.21.5.a547-b

Visualizing the CFTR and ENaC association in living cells

2007· article· en· W45007527 on OpenAlexaff
Bakhrom K. Berdiev, Estelle Cormet‐Boyaka, Ria Oosterveld‐Hut, Albert Tousson, Gergely Gy Kovacs, Yawar J. Qadri, Cathy M. Fuller, Gergely L. Lukács, Dale Benos

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsFörster resonance energy transferImmunoprecipitationChemistryEpithelial sodium channelHEK 293 cellsBiophysicsFluorescenceBiochemistryBiologyGeneSodiumPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The molecular events underlying CFTR‐ENaC coupling, two major transport proteins implicated in pathophysiology of Cystic Fibrosis, is obscure. In an attempt to examine the intermolecular interaction of these proteins we used fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) microscopy. FRET is distance‐dependent imaging approach to measure protein‐protein interactions. To measure FRET we used acceptor bleaching, and monitored the donor's fluorescence lifetime by frequency domain fluorescence lifetime imaging microscopy (FLIM). These FRET measurements were complemented by coimmunoprecipitation experiments. Apparent FRET efficiencies ( E ) averaged ~8% but values as high as ~17% were observed, significant when compared to the negative control and comparable to E reported in other FRET studies. No appreciable FRET signal was observed when ECFP‐ClC1 was co‐transfected with αβ γ‐ENaC (<1%). When CFTR and ENaC subunits were over‐expressed in HEK293T cells, we found that β‐ENaC could be co‐immunoprecipitated with CFTR. Under the same condition, we were unable to co‐immunoprecipitate β‐ENaC with ECFP‐ClC1. Our results place CFTR and ENaC in close proximity to each other, suggestive of direct interaction between these two proteins. Supported by NIH 2RO1‐DK37206‐15, NIH P50 DK53090‐05.

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)0.000
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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances→French-language works237,207→