MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009755950 · doi:10.1139/b04-125

Characterization of the<i>sleepy sperm</i>mutant in the fern<i>Ceratopteris richardii</i>: A new model for the study of axonemal function

2004· article· en· W2009755950 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Karen S. Renzaglia, Kelly Davidson Wood, Gerald Rupp, Leslie G. Hickok

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFern and Epiphyte Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAxonemeBiologyMutantMotilityFlagellumCell biologySperm motilitySpermGeneticsMicrotubuleGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Structural and motility characteristics of the zzz1 "sleepy sperm" mutant of Ceratopteris richardii Brongn. are described using scanning electron, transmission electron, light, and fluorescence microscopy. Although the zzz1 phenotype segregates as the product of a single gene mutation, the expression of the mutation varies within a single haploid gametophyte. The majority of mutant sperm cells are slow to initiate motility and typically swim in a slow, spiraling pattern. However, motility phenotypes range from immotile to wild-type (normal). This variable phenotypic expression is associated with a wide range of defects in the microtubule systems, especially the flagellar axonemes and the spline, a structure that provides a structural backbone for the cell. Defects in the spline microtubule array are associated with atypical cell shape and organellar positioning. Axonemal aberrations include an absence of the central pair complex and clumped flagella. We hypothesize that the gene product encoded by the zzz1 locus is not required for the establishment of the cytoskeletal elements necessary for sperm motility but rather is needed for stability and (or) repair (recycling) of these structures. This interpretation is consistent with the variable expression of zzz1 sperm, which appears to be age dependent.Key words: axoneme, microtubule, motility mutant, sperm cell, ultrastructure.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.901

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations6
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicFern and Epiphyte BiologyFrench-language works237,207