MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7039037182

Isolation and Characterization of the Corticotropin Releasing Factor-like Diuretic Hormone Receptor in Rhodnius prolixus

2015· dissertation· en· W7039037182 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRhodnius prolixusMalpighian tubule systemReceptorDiuresisDiureticHormoneSecretion
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rhodnius prolixus is a hemipteran insect which undergoes rapid post-feeding diuresis following ingestion of a large blood meal that can be up to 10 times initial body weight. Corticotropin releasing factor-like diuretic hormone (Rhopr-CRF/DH) is involved in the neurohormonal synergism that increases rates of fluid secretion by Malpighian tubules over 1000 fold during rapid post-feeding diuresis. In this study, the Rhopr-CRF/DH receptor was isolated and characterized from fifth instar R .prolixus. The receptor is a family B G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) and was deorphaned using a Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cell line. RT-qPCR demonstrated strong receptor expression in the digestive tissues, upper Malpighian tubules and the reproductive tissues. Finally, a modified Human embryonic kidney (HEK293) cell line was used to verify the initiation of the cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) pathway upon activation of the receptor. Characterization of the CRF/DH receptor will serve to elicit better understanding into the precise coordination of diuresis and other physiological processes.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)→Same topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research→French-language works237,207→