MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143110959 · doi:10.1039/c0sm00134a

Myosin motor mediated contraction is enough to produce cytokinesis in the absence of polymerisation

2010· article· en· W2143110959 on OpenAlexaff
Jan Åström, Sebastian von Alfthan, P. B. Sunil Kumar, Mikko Karttunen

Bibliographic record

VenueSoft Matter · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersAcademy of Finland
KeywordsCytokinesisCleavage furrowMyosinActinProtein filamentBiophysicsCell divisionCleavage (geology)Contraction (grammar)SeptinChemistryCell biologyBiologyMaterials scienceCellBiochemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Actin filament networks play an active role in cytokinesis of eukaryotic cells. These networks, linked mainly by myosin, are concentrated below the cell membrane forming a spherical supporting shell. During cytokinesis, this network is modified such that a contractile ring is formed along the diameter of the shell. We present a realistic three-dimensional simulation model to study the dynamics of this spherical shell of elastic actin filaments and myosin motors. The results show compelling evidence that this fibre-spring model, with the motors activated in a narrow region around the division plane, is sufficient to reproduce most of the essential mechanics of cytokinesis: A spontaneous formation of a contractile ring, a characteristic filament orientation structure, and realistic cleavage furrow dynamics. These results demonstrate that, though cytokinesis is a highly complex process with large variation in intricate details, the fundamental dynamics are largely generic. In particular, motor mediated contraction of an unstructured filament mesh is sufficient to undergo division without concentrated and directed polymerization in the cleavage zone.

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 score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSoft MatterSame topicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamicsFrench-language works237,207