Myonuclear domain size varies along the lengths of maturing skeletal muscle fibers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a skeletal muscle fiber, each myonucleus is responsible for gene expression in its surrounding cytoplasm. The region of cytoplasm associated with an individual myonucleus is termed myonuclear domain. However, little is known about domain size variation within individual muscle fibers. This study tests the hypothesis that myonuclear domains expressing neonatal myosin within end regions of maturing fibers will be smaller than domains elsewhere in the fibers. The model used is chicken pectoralis, where we have previously shown that during development repression of neonatal myosin radiates from the central region towards the fiber ends. Samples excised from birds aged nine through to 115 days after hatching were sectioned transversely. Using computer image analysis and immunocytochemistry, fiber profiles were classified as neonatal, transforming or adult. Each profile was also located in an adjacent dystrophin-labelled section, where myonuclei were visualized using haematoxylin and bisbenzamide. Variation in myonuclear length with age was not found to be significant (p = 0.925). Myonuclei were counted, and formulae used to calculate mean myonuclear domain size for each profile type. Myonuclear number/mm fiber was calculated to be adult (mean = 108.57 myonuclei/mm), transforming (65.82) and neonatal (25.23). Transforming profiles had significantly (p=0.027) more myonuclei/mm than neonatal, as did adult (p=0.005). Volume of cytoplasm/myonucleus was adult (mean = 16,132 microm3/myonucleus), transforming (12,899) and neonatal (8,130). Transforming and adult profiles had significantly (p<0.001) larger myonuclear domains than did neonatal profiles. Transforming and adult profiles did not differ in either myonuclei/mm (p=0.302) or volume of cytoplasm/myonucleus (p=0.413). This study demonstrates smaller domains at the terminal tips of maturing muscle fibers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".