The role of actin and myosin in PtK2 spindle length changes induced by laser microbeam irradiations across the spindle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates spindle biomechanical properties to better understand how spindles function. In this report, laser microbeam cutting across mitotic spindles resulted in movement of spindle poles toward the spindle equator. The pole on the cut side moved first, the other pole moved later, resulting in a shorter but symmetric spindle. Intervening spindle microtubules bent and buckled during the equatorial movement of the poles. Because of this and because there were no detectable microtubules within the ablation zone, other cytoskeletal elements would seem to be involved in the equatorial movement of the poles. One possibility is actin and myosin since pharmacological poisoning of the actin-myosin system altered the equatorial movements of both irradiated and unirradiated poles. Immunofluorescence microscopy confirmed that actin, myosin and monophosphorylated myosin are associated with spindle fibers and showed that some actin and monophosphorylated myosin remained in the irradiated regions. Overall, our experiments suggest that actin, myosin and microtubules interact to control spindle length. We suggest that actin and myosin, possibly in conjunction with the spindle matrix, cause the irradiated pole to move toward the equator and that cross-talk between the two half spindles causes the unirradiated pole to move toward the equator until a balanced length is obtained.
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 | 0.000 |
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".