Making the Body Plan: Precision in the Genetic Hierarchy of Drosophila Embryo Segmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We quantify fluctuations in protein expression for three of the segmentation genes in the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster. These proteins are representative members of the first three levels of a signalling hierarchy which determines the segmented body plan: maternal (Bicoid protein); gap (Hunchback protein); and pair-rule (Even-skipped protein). We quantify both inter-embryo and inter-nucleus (within a single embryo) variability in expression, especially with respect to positional specification by concentration gradient reading. Errors are quantified both early and late in cleavage cycle 14, during which the protein patterns develop, to study the dynamics of error transmission. We find that Bicoid displays very large positional errors, while expression of the downstream genes, Hunchback and Even-skipped, displays far more precise positioning. This is evidence that the pattern formation of the downstream proteins is at least partially independent of maternal signal, i. e. evidence against simple concentration gradient reading. We also find that fractional errors in concentration increase during cleavage cycle 14.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 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".