MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6948698404 · doi:10.5061/dryad.xsj3tx9bd

A human IgSF cell-surface interactome reveals a complex network of protein-protein interactions

2020· dataset· en· W6948698404 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDRYAD · 2020
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsOntario Genomics
FundersNational Institutes of HealthG. Harold and Leila Y. Mathers Foundation
KeywordsInteractomeProtein–protein interactionImmunoglobulin superfamilySUPERFAMILYInteraction networkSurface plasmon resonanceBiological networkPlasma protein bindingImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cell-surface protein-protein interactions (PPIs) mediate cell-cell communication, recognition and responses. We executed an interactome screen of 564 human cell-surface and secreted proteins, most of which are immunoglobulin superfamily (IgSF) proteins, using a high-throughput, automated ELISA-based screening platform employing a pooled-protein strategy to test all 318,096 PPI combinations. Screen results, augmented by phylogenetic homology analysis, revealed ~380 previously unreported PPIs. We validated a subset using surface plasmon resonance and cell binding assays. Observed PPIs reveal a large and complex network of interactions both within and across biological systems. We identified new PPIs for receptors with well-characterized ligands, and binding partners for ‘orphan’ receptors. New PPIs include proteins expressed on multiple cell types, and involved in diverse processes including immune and nervous system development and function, differentiation/proliferation, metabolism, vascularization, and reproduction. These PPIs provide a resource for further biological investigation into their functional relevance, and may offer new therapeutic drug targets.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.011

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDRYADFrench-language works237,207