MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033477896 · doi:10.1242/dev.01883

Muscle arm development in <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i>

2005· article· en· W2033477896 on OpenAlexafffund
Scott J. Dixon, Peter J. Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthTerry Fox FoundationOntario Innovation Trust
KeywordsBiologyCaenorhabditis elegansSarcomereMyosinActinCell biologyAnatomyMyocyteMyofilamentTropomyosinNeuromuscular junctionMuscle contractionNeuroscienceGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In several types of animals, muscle cells use membrane extensions to contact motor axons during development. To better understand the process of membrane extension in muscle cells, we investigated the development of Caenorhabditis elegans muscle arms, which extend to motor axons and form the postsynaptic element of the neuromuscular junction. We found that muscle arm development is a highly regulated process: the number of muscle arms extended by each muscle, the shape of the muscle arms and the path taken by the muscle arms to reach the motor axons are largely stereotypical. We also investigated the role of several cytoskeletal components and regulators during arm development, and found that tropomyosin (LEV-11), the actin depolymerizing activity of ADF/cofilin (UNC-60B) and, surprisingly, myosin heavy chain B (UNC-54) are each required for muscle arm extension. This is the first evidence that UNC-54, which is found in thick filaments of sarcomeres, can also play a role in membrane extension. The muscle arm phenotypes produced when these genes are mutated support a 'two-phase' model that distinguishes passive muscle arm development in embryogenesis from active muscle arm extension during larval development.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations72
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmentSame topicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model OrganismsFrench-language works237,207