Cell dynamics and developmental bias in the ontogeny of a complex sexually dimorphic trait in<i>Drosophila melanogaster</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Drosophila sex comb (SC) has been hailed as a powerful tool for integrative studies in development, evolution, and behavior, but its ontogeny is poorly understood, even in the model organism Drosophila melanogaster. Using 4D live imaging and other techniques, we carried out a detailed analysis of the cellular events that take place during the development of the SC. We showed that the comb and other contiguous bristle formations assemble from noncontiguous precursor cells, which join together through intercalation. Most of the rotation of the SC (which has a longitudinal orientation in D. melanogaster but is initially transverse) occurs after this stage, when the structure is a single unit. We have provided evidence that male-specific convergent extension through cell rearrangement is responsible for both this rotation and another sexually dimorphic bristle trait. Contiguous bristle formations act as barriers to cell movement within the epithelium, and we demonstrated that a particularly rapid rotation of the proximal region of the comb is associated with the presence of a constricted area between a portion of the SC and a transverse row of contiguous bristle precursors. Our results suggest that the cell dynamics in the neighborhood of the SC may have biased its evolution.
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".