MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1911021731 · doi:10.1083/jcb.201501076

Polarized E-cadherin endocytosis directs actomyosin remodeling during embryonic wound repair

2015· article· en· W1911021731 on OpenAlexafffund
Miranda V. Hunter, Donghoon M. Lee, Tony Harris, Rodrigo Fernández‐González

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Cell Biology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCellular Mechanics and Interactions
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersConnaught FundUniversity of TorontoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaTechnische Universiteit Delft
KeywordsEndocytosisCell biologyBiologyEndocytic cycleWound healingActinEmbryonic stem cellCellBiochemistryImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Embryonic epithelia have a remarkable ability to rapidly repair wounds. A supracellular actomyosin cable around the wound coordinates cellular movements and promotes wound closure. Actomyosin cable formation is accompanied by junctional rearrangements at the wound margin. We used in vivo time-lapse quantitative microscopy to show that clathrin, dynamin, and the ADP-ribosylation factor 6, three components of the endocytic machinery, accumulate around wounds in Drosophila melanogaster embryos in a process that requires calcium signaling and actomyosin contractility. Blocking endocytosis with pharmacological or genetic approaches disrupted wound repair. The defect in wound closure was accompanied by impaired removal of E-cadherin from the wound edge and defective actomyosin cable assembly. E-cadherin overexpression also resulted in reduced actin accumulation around wounds and slower wound closure. Reducing E-cadherin levels in embryos in which endocytosis was blocked rescued actin localization to the wound margin. Our results demonstrate a central role for endocytosis in wound healing and indicate that polarized E-cadherin endocytosis is necessary for actomyosin remodeling during embryonic wound repair.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations86
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Cell BiologySame topicCellular Mechanics and InteractionsFrench-language works237,207