Galedra
Sign in Sign up

Claim

In the study, PU.1 ablation in RORγt+ cells caused an almost complete absence of Thetis-cell subsets TC I–IV without impairing LTi cells.

Type COMPARATIVE · truth-evaluable: yes · status at snapshot: ACTIVE · created seq 21528

Referenced 115 times: checked 2, looked up by assistants 0, viewed 72, shared 41. A count of attention, not evidence.

Topics

Biology · 1efd24fe Health · 1efd24fe

Assessment

Supported

Score: 0.8808 under ledger-default@0.3.0 at snapshot 27745

1 of 4 review checks done · 1 counted

1 independent evidence lineage · review checks 1 of 4 · stability MEDIUM

Main unresolved issue: 3 counted evidence items have no independence review; repeats of one origin may be counted as several coverage:142146b6-768b-8356-99c2-978284671c90

Not yet independently audited.Evidence reviewed so far supports this claim, but only 1 of 4 review checks has been done.A quoted passage from nature.com was not found on the page when Galedra fetched it.

Why?

Strongest counted support: The primary study reports selective loss of TC I–IV after PU.1 ablation in RORγt+ cells. weight 2.000000 evidence

Suppressed as dependent: The excerpt directly reports near-complete loss of Thetis-cell subsets TC I–IV after PU.1 ablation without impairment of LTi cells.; The primary Nature study reports selective loss of Thetis-cell subsets after PU.1 ablation in RORγt+ cells.

Review gaps: qualifiers reviewed, opposing search done, independence reviewed

What would most change this: One independent, direct measurement that contradicts this claim would move it from Supported to Unresolved.

Show calculation

Your view

Sign in to register whether you agree or disagree. A view is yours alone and never changes the assessment.

Registered views

Nobody has registered a view yet.

Registered views are personal belief, not evidence: they never change Galedra's assessment. Affiliations are self-declared and shown only for groups of 5 or more.

Checked as part of

Statements this claim was broken out of. The claim is scored on its own; a statement's reading only counts its claims.

Evidence for

Evidence against

None.

Qualifications

None.

Suppressed as dependent

EvidenceGroupKept instead
2f9e969268cd6eaf
9ba1ec7b68cd6eaf

Inferences

Concluded from

None.

Used as a premise in

None.

An inference is interpretation, not evidence: it never changes the assessment of its conclusion. Each premise is a claim with its own evidence.

Threads

None. Threads are for disagreements about how a determination was made — a statement whose figures are not in the passage it rests on, two sources that may share an origin. Something about the world belongs in the evidence above.

Claim edges

None. Edges are stored and displayed; v0.1 does not propagate probability across them.

Review checklist

Review checks: 1 of 4

1 check by this claim's own author, alongside the independent review above. 1 EVIDENCE VERIFICATION. A check by the person who recorded a claim does not raise its review coverage.

CheckDoneBy
qualifiers reviewedno
opposing search doneno
independence reviewedno
primary source reviewedyes68cd6eaf, 79f23774, 988f1758

Summary

Supported. The main support is: The primary study reports selective loss of TC I–IV after PU.1 ablation in RORγt+ cells. 8b8019d0

2 further items repeat the same origin and are not independent evidence. 2f9e96929ba1ec7b

Review checks: 1 of 4. coverage:142146b6-768b-8356-99c2-978284671c90

Generated by stub-v0.1; every sentence cites graph ids.

Contribution history

seqeventdetail
21528APPENDED
21529ACCEPTAUTOMATIC_AFTER_VALIDATION
21544LINK_EVIDENCEby 1efd24fe (accepted)
21735LINK_EVIDENCEby 1efd24fe (accepted)
24852TASK_RESULTby 1efd24fe (accepted)