Segregation of Ipsilateral Retinal Ganglion Cell Axons at the Optic Chiasm Requires the Shh Receptor Boc
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pattern of contralaterally and ipsilaterally projecting retinal ganglion cell (RGC) axons at the optic chiasm is essential for the establishment of binocular vision. Contralateral axons cross the chiasm midline as they progress from the optic nerve to the optic tract. In contrast, ipsilateral axons deviate from the chiasm and continue in the ipsilateral optic tract, avoiding the chiasm midline. The molecular mechanism underlying this phenomenon is not completely understood. Here we show that the Sonic Hedgehog (Shh) receptor Boc is enriched in ipsilateral RGCs of the developing retina. Together with the presence of Shh at the midline, this complementary expression pattern led us to hypothesize that Shh might repel ipsilateral RGC axons at the chiasm. Consistent with this hypothesis, we found that only Boc-positive RGC axons retract in vitro in response to Shh and that this response is lost in Boc mutant RGCs. In vivo, we show that Boc is required for the normal segregation of ipsilateral axons at the optic chiasm and, conversely, that Boc expression in contralateral RGCs prevents their axons from crossing the optic chiasm. Together, these results suggest that Shh repels ipsilateral RGC axons at the optic chiasm via its receptor Boc. This work identifies a novel molecular pathway required for the segregation of axons at the optic chiasm.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".