MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122674896 · doi:10.1095/biolreprod.111.097972

Translation of incenp During Oocyte Maturation Is Required for Embryonic Development in Xenopus laevis1

2012· article· en· W2122674896 on OpenAlexafffund
Geoffrey Leblond, Heather Sarazin, Ruizhen Li, Makoto Suzuki, Naoto Ueno, X. Johné Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of Reproduction · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsOocyteBiologyOocyte activationCell biologyPolar bodyMaturation promoting factorAurora B kinaseCyclin BMeiosis IIXenopusGeneticsCell cycleCyclinSpindle apparatusEmbryoCell divisionCell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The chromosome passenger complex (CPC) consists of Aurora-B kinase and several other subunits. One of these, incenp, binds Aurora-B and regulates its kinase activity. During Xenopus oocyte maturation, incenp accumulates through translation, contributing to aurora-b activation. A previous study has demonstrated that inhibition of incenp translation during oocyte maturation diminishes aurora-b activation but does not interfere with oocyte maturation, characterized by normal maturation-specific cyclin-b phosphorylation, degradation, and resynthesis. Here we have extended these findings, showing that inhibition of incenp translation during oocyte maturation did not interfere with meiosis I or II, as indicated by the normal emission of the first polar body and metaphase II arrest, followed by the successful emission of the second polar body upon parthenogenetic egg activation. Most importantly, however, when transferred to host frogs and subsequently ovulated, the incenp-deficient eggs were fertilized but failed to undergo mitotic cleavage. Thus, translation of incenp during oocyte maturation appears to be part of oocyte cytoplasmic maturation, preparing the egg for the rapid mitosis following fertilization.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations17
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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