MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041754318 · doi:10.1002/dvdy.22133

A co‐dependent requirement of xBcl9 and Pygopus for embryonic body axis development in <i>Xenopus</i>

2009· article· en· W2041754318 on OpenAlexafffund
Mark Kennedy, Sang‐Wook Cha, Emmanuel Tadjuidje, Phillip Andrews, Janet Heasman, Kenneth R. Kao

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Dynamics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDevelopmental Biology and Gene Regulation
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologyWnt signaling pathwayBlastulaXenopusCell biologyPolarity in embryogenesisCateninTranscription factorEmbryonic stem cellEmbryonic InductionAnatomyEmbryogenesisEmbryoGeneGeneticsSignal transductionMesodermGastrulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Wnt/beta-catenin transcriptional activation complex requires the adapter protein Pygopus (Pygo), which links the basal transcription machinery to beta-catenin, by its association with legless (Lgs)/ B-cell lymphoma-9 (Bcl9). Pygo was shown to be required for development in vertebrates, but the role of Lgs/Bcl9 is unknown. We identified an amphibian orthologue of Lgs/Bcl9, XBcl9, which interacted biochemically with Xbeta-catenin and XPygo2. The body axis promoting ability of Xbeta-catenin was diminished when residues required for its interaction with XBcl9 were mutated. In blastula embryos, XBcl9 was transiently preferentially expressed in nuclei of dorsoanterior cells and ectopically expressed XBcl9 required XPygo2 to localize to nuclei. Furthermore, while neither XBcl9 nor XPygo2 alone affected development when ectopically expressed, both were required to induce supernumerary axis and dorsal gene activation. Like XPygo2, depletion of maternal XBcl9 alone caused dorsal defects. These results indicated an essential role of the Pygo-Bcl9 duet in vertebrate body axis formation.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score0.938

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental DynamicsSame topicDevelopmental Biology and Gene RegulationFrench-language works237,207