MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056988421 · doi:10.1042/bc20050081

Regulation of the actin cytoskeleton by PIP2 in cytokinesis

2006· review· en· W2056988421 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Logan, Craig A. Mandato

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of the Cell · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCytokinesisBiologyCell biologyActinCytoskeletonActin cytoskeletonCellCell divisionGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cytokinesis is a sequential process that occurs in three phases: assembly of the cytokinetic apparatus, furrow progression and fission (abscission) of the newly formed daughter cells. The ingression of the cleavage furrow is dependent on the constriction of an equatorial actomyosin ring in many cell types. Recent studies have demonstrated that this structure is highly dynamic and undergoes active polymerization and depolymerization throughout the furrowing process. Despite much progress in the identification of contractile ring components, little is known regarding the mechanism of its assembly and structural rearrangements. PIP2 (phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate) is a critical regulator of actin dynamics and plays an essential role in cell motility and adhesion. Recent studies have indicated that an elevation of PIP2 at the cleavage furrow is a critical event for furrow stability. In this review we discuss the role of PIP2-mediated signalling in the structural maintenance of the contractile ring and furrow progression. In addition, we address the role of other phosphoinositides, PI(4)P (phosphatidylinositol 4-phosphate) and PIP3 (phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-triphosphate) in these processes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations152
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology of the CellSame topicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamicsFrench-language works237,207