MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975031748 · doi:10.1242/dev.037911

The<i>Tbx20</i>homologs<i>midline</i>and<i>H15</i>specify ventral fate in the<i>Drosophila melanogaster</i>leg

2009· article· en· W1975031748 on OpenAlexafffund
Pia C. Svendsen, Ann Formaz‐Preston, Sandra Leal, William J. Brook

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDevelopmental Biology and Gene Regulation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research
KeywordsBiologyDecapentaplegicDrosophila melanogasterCell fate determinationTranscription factorAnatomyCell biologyUltrabithoraxMesodermFate mappingGeneticsImaginal discGeneEmbryonic stem cellHomeotic gene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regional fates in the developing limbs of Drosophila melanogaster are controlled by selector gene transcription factors. Ventral fate in the fly leg is specified by the expression of the ligand Wingless. We present evidence that midline and H15, members of the Tbx20 class of T-box transcription factors, are key mediators of the Wingless signal in the formation of the ventral region of the fly leg. midline and H15 are restricted to identical ventral domains of expression through activation by Wingless and repression by the dorsal signal Decapentaplegic. midline and H15 function redundantly and cell autonomously in the formation of ventral-specific structures. Conversely, midline is sufficient to induce ventral fate. Finally, the induction of ectopic ventral fate by mid is compromised when Wingless signaling is attenuated, suggesting that Wingless acts both upstream and in parallel with midline/H15 to specify ventral fate. Based on these results, we propose that midline and H15 may be considered as the selector genes for ventral leg fate.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.404
Threshold uncertainty score0.581

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmentSame topicDevelopmental Biology and Gene RegulationFrench-language works237,207