MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963903602 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1221677110

Quantification of cellular penetrative forces using lab-on-a-chip technology and finite element modeling

2013· article· en· W1963903602 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Sanati‐Nezhad, Mahsa Naghavi, Muthukumaran Packirisamy, Rama Bhat, Anja Geitmann

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Reproductive Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurgor pressureHydrostatic pressurePollen tubeFinite element methodPolydimethylsiloxaneHydrostatic equilibriumMaterials sciencePlant cellMicrofluidicsDeformation (meteorology)MechanicsBiophysicsChemistryNanotechnologyComposite materialBiologyBotanyStructural engineeringPhysicsPollenEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tip-growing cells have the unique property of invading living tissues and abiotic growth matrices. To do so, they exert significant penetrative forces. In plant and fungal cells, these forces are generated by the hydrostatic turgor pressure. Using the TipChip, a microfluidic lab-on-a-chip device developed for tip-growing cells, we tested the ability to exert penetrative forces generated in pollen tubes, the fastest-growing plant cells. The tubes were guided to grow through microscopic gaps made of elastic polydimethylsiloxane material. Based on the deformation of the gaps, the force exerted by the elongating tubes to permit passage was determined using finite element methods. The data revealed that increasing mechanical impedance was met by the pollen tubes through modulation of the cell wall compliance and, thus, a change in the force acting on the obstacle. Tubes that successfully passed a narrow gap frequently burst, raising questions about the sperm discharge mechanism in the flowering plants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations89
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicPlant Reproductive BiologyFrench-language works237,207