Hydrostatic pressure sensation in cells: integration into the tensegrity model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydrostatic pressure (HP) is a mechanical stimulus that has received relatively little attention in the field of the cell biology of mechanotransduction. Generalized models, such as the tensegrity model, do not provide a detailed explanation of how HP might be detected. This is significant, because HP is an important mechanical stimulus, directing cell behaviour in a variety of tissues, including cartilage, bone, airways, and the vasculature. HP sensitivity may also be an important factor in certain clinical situations, as well as under unique environmental conditions such as microgravity. While downstream cellular effects have been well characterized, the initial HP sensation mechanism remains unclear. In vitro evidence shows that HP affects cytoskeletal polymerization, an effect that may be crucial in triggering the cellular response. The balance between free monomers and cytoskeletal polymers is shifted by alterations in HP, which could initiate a cellular response by releasing and (or) activating cytoskeleton-associated proteins. This new model fits well with the basic tenets of the existing tensegrity model, including mechanisms in which cellular HP sensitivity could be tuned to accommodate variable levels of stress.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".