MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995511802 · doi:10.1088/1478-3975/8/4/045001

Mesoderm layer formation in<i>Xenopus</i>and<i>Drosophila</i>gastrulation

2011· article· en· W1995511802 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Biology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMesodermEctodermGerm layerCell biologyGastrulationEndodermBiologyXenopusFGF and mesoderm formationNODALAnatomyEmbryogenesisGeneticsCellular differentiationEmbryoEmbryonic stem cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During gastrulation, the mesoderm spreads out between ectoderm and endoderm to form a mesenchymal cell layer. Surprisingly the underlying principles of mesoderm layer formation are very similar in evolutionarily distant species like the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, and the frog, Xenopus laevis, in which the molecular and the cellular basis of mesoderm layer formation have been extensively studied. Complementary expression of growth factors in the ectoderm and their receptors in the mesoderm act to orient cellular protrusive activities and direct cell movement, leading to radial cell intercalation and the spreading of the mesoderm layer. This mechanism is contrasted with generic physical mechanisms of tissue spreading that consider the adhesive and physical properties of the cells and tissues. Both mechanisms need to be integrated to orchestrate mesenchymal morphogenesis.

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.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.233 · 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