Effects of microgravity on cell cytoskeleton and embryogenesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this review is to compile, summarize and discuss the effects of microgravity on embryos, cell structure and function that have been demonstrated from data obtained during experiments performed in space or in altered gravity induced by clinostats. In cells and tissues cellular structure and genetic expression may be changed in microgravity and this has a variety of effects on embryogenesis which include death of the embryo, failure of neural tube closure, or final deformities to the overall morphology of the newborn or hatchling. Many species and protocols have been used for microgravity space experiments making it difficult to compare results. Experiments on the ways in which embryonic development and cell interactions occur in microgravity could also be performed. Experiments that have been done with cells in microgravity show changes in morphology, cytoskeleton and function. Changes in cytoskeleton have been noted and studies on microtubules in gravity have shown that they are gravity sensitive. Further study of basic chemical reactions that occur in cells should be done to shed some light on the underling processes leading to the changes that are observed in cells and embryos in microgravity.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".