MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072657524 · doi:10.1262/jrd.20096

Second Meiotic Spindle Integrity Requires MEK/MAP Kinase Activity in Mouse Eggs

2009· article· en· W2072657524 on OpenAlexafffund
Mary Ann F. Petrunewich, James R. Trimarchi, Amy Katherine Lindsey HANLAN, Mary‐Anne Hammer, Jay M. Baltz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reproduction and Development · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCell biologyMeiosisKinaseChemistryBiologyBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ERK-type MAP kinase activity is required for normal first meiotic (MI) metaphase spindle dynamics and first polar body formation at the MI/MII transition, and for MII arrest until egg activation. MEK and MAPK, however, remain active until meiosis is completed and pronuclei form, but whether MEK/MAPK activity affects MII spindle function during egg activation has been unknown. Polarized light microscopy revealed that the MII spindle rapidly (within approximately 15 min) lost birefringence upon treatment of the egg with U0126, indicating decreased organization at the molecular level upon MEK inhibition. In contrast, birefringence rapidly increased when MPF was inhibited with roscovitine, and this was similar to the increased birefringence previously shown after fertilization or parthenogenetic activation with Sr(2+). Confocal microscopy indicated that many spindles in U0126-activated eggs had failed to rotate or were dissociated from the egg cortex. Subsequently, abnormally-located midbodies were evident in U0126-induced parthenogenotes. Thus, MEK/MAPK activity is required to maintain the ordered structure of the MII spindle and for normal spindle dynamics during second polar body 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)0.001
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 score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations14
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reproduction and DevelopmentSame topicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamicsFrench-language works237,207