MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053848301 · doi:10.1100/tsw.2006.327

Newt Opportunities for Understanding the Dedifferentiation Process

2006· review· en· W2053848301 on OpenAlexafffund
Ziad Y. Chaar, Catherine Tsilfidis

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Scientific World JOURNAL · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDevelopmental Biology and Gene Regulation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsRegeneration (biology)Notophthalmus viridescensForelimbBiologyProcess (computing)Embryonic stem cellRegenerative processCell biologyPopulationAnatomyTriturusBlastemaAmphibianNeuroscienceEvolutionary biologyComputer scienceEcologyMedicineGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urodele amphibians, such as the newt Notophthalmus viridescens, have the unique ability to regenerate limbs, spinal cord, eye structures, and many vital organs through a process called epimorphic regeneration. Although the cellular basis of regeneration has been studied in detail, we know relatively little about the molecular controls of the process. This review provides an overview of forelimb regeneration in the newt, addressing what we know about cellular and molecular aspects. Particular focus is placed on the dedifferentiation process, which yields a population of embryonic-like pluripotent cells that will eventually reform the lost structure. This cellular plasticity seems to be the key to regenerative ability. We discuss the dedifferentiation process in newt forelimb regeneration and outline the various studies that have revealed that mammalian cells also have the ability to dedifferentiate if given the appropriate triggers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.854
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.181 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations13
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Scientific World JOURNALSame topicDevelopmental Biology and Gene RegulationFrench-language works237,207