The characean internodal cell as a model system for studying wound healing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work describes the characean internodal cell as a model system for the study of wound healing and compares wounds induced by certain chemicals and UV irradiation with wounds occurring in the natural environment. We review the existing literature and define three types of wound response: (1) cortical window formation characterised by disassembly of microtubules, transient inhibition of actin-dependent cytoplasmic streaming and chloroplast detachment, (2) fibrillar wound walls characterised by exocytosis of vesicles carrying wall polysaccharides and membrane-bound cellulose synthase complexes coupled with endocytosis of surplus membrane and (3) amorphous, callose- and membrane-containing wound walls characterised by exocytosis of vesicles and endoplasmic reticulum cisternae in the absence of membrane recycling. We hypothesize that these three wound responses reflect the extent of damage, probably Ca(2+) influx, and that the secretion of Ca(2+) -loaded endoplasmic reticulum cisternae is an emergency reaction in case of severe Ca(2+) load. Microtubules are not required for wound healing but their disassembly could have a signalling function. Transient reorganisation of the actin cytoskeleton into a meshwork of randomly oriented filaments is required for the migration of wound wall forming organelles, just as occurs in tip-growing plant cells. New data presented in this study show that during the deposition of an amorphous wound wall numerous actin rings are present, which may indicate specific ion fluxes and/or a storage form for actin. In addition, we present new evidence for the exocytosis of FM1-43-stained organelles, putative endosomes, required for plasma membrane repair during wound healing. Finally, we show that quickly growing fibrillar wound walls, even when deposited in the absence of microtubules, have a highly ordered helical structure of consistent handedness comprised of cellulose microfibrils.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".