Drosophila <scp>S2</scp> Cells Secrete Wingless on Exosome‐Like Vesicles but the Wingless Gradient Forms Independently of Exosomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wingless acts as a morphogen in Drosophila wing discs, where it specifies cell fates and controls growth several cell diameters away from its site of expression. Thus, despite being acylated and membrane associated, Wingless spreads in the extracellular space. Recent studies have focussed on identifying the route that Wingless follows in the secretory pathway and determining how it is packaged for release. We have found that, in medium conditioned by Wingless-expressing Drosophila S2 cells, Wingless is present on exosome-like vesicles and that this fraction activates signal transduction. Proteomic analysis shows that Wingless-containing exosome-like structures contain many Drosophila proteins that are homologous to mammalian exosome proteins. In addition, Evi, a multipass transmembrane protein, is also present on exosome-like vesicles. Using these exosome markers and a cell-based RNAi assay, we found that the small GTPase Rab11 contributes significantly to exosome production. This finding allows us to conclude from in vivo Rab11 knockdown experiments, that exosomes are unlikely to contribute to Wingless secretion and gradient formation in wing discs. Consistent with this conclusion, extracellularly tagged Evi expressed from a Bacterial Artificial Chromosome is not released from imaginal disc Wingless-expressing cells.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".