MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6999748591

Development and Validation of a Novel Quantitative Assay for Cell surface Expression of GPCRs using a Receptor β-lactamase fusion Protein and the Colourometric Substrate Nitrocefin

2013· dissertation· en· W6999748591 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsG protein-coupled receptorReceptorInternalizationSubstrate (aquarium)CellCell membraneAgonistFusionLipid bilayer fusion
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trafficking of GPCRs is a dynamic process that is tightly regulated and sometimes defective in human diseases. Therefore it is important to develop new methods to allow simple and quantitative measurement of surface expression of membrane proteins. Here we describe the development and validation of a new assay for quantification of cell surface expression of GPCRs using β-lactamase as a reporter. For this assay we N-terminally fused β-lactamase (βlac) to the β2-adrenergic receptor (β2AR) and GABA b R1 (GBR1). The results obtained by the βlac assay are quantitatively and qualitatively similar to well established ELISA when measuring agonist induced internalization of β2AR. We also show that measurement of GBR1 surface expression with GBR2 co-expression is quantitatively identical between the βlac and ELISA. In conclusion, our results show that our newly developed βlac assay is quantitatively similar while being less expensive, more robust and higher throughput compared to an ELISA.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.184
Teacher spread0.175 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)→Same topicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling→French-language works237,207→