MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055124799 · doi:10.1242/dev.064279

Smarcd3b and Gata5 promote a cardiac progenitor fate in the zebrafish embryo

2011· article· en· W2055124799 on OpenAlexafffund
Xin Lou, Ashish R. Deshwar, J. Gage Crump, Ian C. Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCongenital heart defects research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHeart and Stroke FoundationHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologyZebrafishMesodermEndodermCell biologyEmbryonic stem cellEndocardiumEmbryoProgenitor cellHeart developmentCell fate determinationCellular differentiationLateral plate mesodermProgenitorGATA4Stem cellGeneticsInternal medicineTranscription factorGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Development of the heart requires recruitment of cardiovascular progenitor cells (CPCs) to the future heart-forming region. CPCs are the building blocks of the heart, and have the potential to form all the major cardiac lineages. However, little is known regarding what regulates CPC fate and behavior. Activity of GATA4, SMARCD3 and TBX5 - the `cardiac BAF' (cBAF) complex, can promote myocardial differentiation in embryonic mouse mesoderm. Here, we exploit the advantages of the zebrafish embryo to gain mechanistic understanding of cBAF activity. Overexpression of smarcd3b and gata5 in zebrafish results in an enlarged heart, whereas combinatorial loss of cBAF components inhibits cardiac differentiation. In transplantation experiments, cBAF acts cell autonomously to promote cardiac fate. Remarkably, cells overexpressing cBAF migrate to the developing heart and differentiate as cardiomyocytes, endocardium and smooth muscle. This is observed even in host embryos that lack endoderm or cardiac mesoderm. Our results reveal an evolutionarily conserved role for cBAF activity in cardiac differentiation. Importantly, they demonstrate that Smarcd3b and Gata5 can induce a primitive, CPC-like state.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.343
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations58
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmentSame topicCongenital heart defects researchFrench-language works237,207