Distinct cellular and molecular mechanisms mediate initial axon development and adult-stage axon regeneration in<i>C. elegans</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The molecular and cellular mechanisms that allow adult-stage neurons to regenerate following damage are poorly understood. Recently, axons of motoneurons and mechanosensory neurons in adult C. elegans were found to regrow after being snipped by femtosecond laser ablation. Here, we explore the molecular determinants of adult-stage axon regeneration using the AVM mechanosensory neurons. The first step in AVM axon development is a pioneer axonal projection from the cell body to the ventral nerve cord. We show that regeneration of the AVM axon to the ventral nerve cord lacks the deterministic precision of initial axon development, requiring competition and pruning of unwanted axon branches. Nevertheless, axons of injured AVM neurons regrow to the ventral nerve cord with over 60% reliability in adult animals. In addition, in contrast to initial development, axon guidance during regeneration becomes heavily dependent on cytoplasmic protein MIG-10/Lamellipodin but independent of UNC-129/TGF-beta repellent and UNC-40/DCC receptor, and axon growth during regeneration becomes heavily dependent on UNC-34/Ena and CED-10/Rac actin regulators. Thus, C. elegans may be used as a genetic system to characterize novel cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying adult-stage nervous system regeneration.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".