Smarcd3b and Gata5 promote a cardiac progenitor fate in the zebrafish embryo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".