Reevaluation of the Role of the <i>med-1</i> and <i>med-2</i> Genes in Specifying the <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i> Endoderm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The med-1 and med-2 genes encode a pair of essentially identical GATA factor-related transcription factors that have been proposed to be necessary for specification of the C. elegans endoderm (intestine or E lineage) as well as part of the C. elegans mesoderm. med-1 and med-2 are proposed to be the direct downstream targets and the principal effectors of the maternally provided SKN-1 transcription factor; med-1 and med-2 would thus occupy the pivotal interface between maternal and zygotic control of gene expression. The conclusion that med-1 and med-2 are necessary for C. elegans endoderm specification was based on a partially penetrant (approximately 50%) loss of endoderm markers produced by RNA-mediated interference (RNAi). To determine whether this partial penetrance reflects: (i) inefficient RNAi against early zygotic transcripts, (ii) experimental uncertainty in the expected level of endoderm loss in skn-1 nulls, or (iii) additional redundancy in the pathway of endoderm specification, we constructed worm strains that segregate embryos lacking both the med-1 gene (because of a gene-specific deletion) and the med-2 gene (using either of two chromosomal deficiencies). Contrary to expectations, we observe that only approximately 3-20% of med-2(-); med-1(-) embryos do not express markers of endoderm differentiation. Furthermore, we found no evidence for a maternal contribution of the med genes to endoderm specification. We conclude that the major pathway(s) for endoderm specification in C. elegans must be independent of the med-1 and med-2 genes.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".