MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982471296 · doi:10.4161/fly.4.2.11251

T-box genes organize the dorsal ventral leg axis in<i>Drosophila melanogaster</i>

2010· review· ru· W1982471296 on OpenAlexafffund
William J. Brook

Bibliographic record

VenueFly · 2010
Typereview
Languageru
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDevelopmental Biology and Gene Regulation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDrosophila melanogasterDorsumDrosophila (subgenus)BiologyAnatomyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A key event in fly limb development is the binary subdivision of the cardinal axes of imaginal discs by selector genes.(1-3) As an example, all limbs are partitioned into anterior and posterior compartments through the expression of engrailed (en) in posterior cells of imaginal discs and en expression is both necessary and sufficient to direct posterior instead of default anterior development.(4-8) In the leg imaginal disc, posterior en-expressing cells secrete the ligand Hedgehog (Hh), which in turn activates ventral Wingless (Wg) expression and dorsal Decapentaplegic (Dpp) expression in domains that bisect the imaginal disc.(9,10) Dpp and Wg act in concert to specify distal fates by inducing the expression of downstream genes including the selector gene Distal-less,(11,12) which is both necessary and sufficient for the development of the distal part of the leg.(13) In contrast, the dorsal (D) versus ventral (V) decision is mediated by antagonistic signaling between Dpp and Wg, with Dpp specifying D and Wg specifying V.(10,14-22) Recently, we have shown that the ventral specific T-box transcription factors midline(mid) and H15 are downstream effectors of Wg acting as selector genes that specify ventral fate.(23).

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.008

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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