MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145679031 · doi:10.1242/dev.103499

Sema6a and Plxna2 mediate spatially regulated repulsion within the developing eye to promote eye vesicle cohesion

2014· article· en· W2145679031 on OpenAlexafffund
Alicia M. Ebert, Sarah J. Childs, Carrie L. Hehr, Paula Bernice Cechmanek, Sarah McFarlane

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAxon Guidance and Neuronal Signaling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryOntario Brain Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Innovates
KeywordsBiologyOptic vesicleEye developmentCell biologySemaphorinVesicleZebrafishMorphogenesisAnatomyReceptorGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Organs are generated from collections of cells that coalesce and remain together as they undergo a series of choreographed movements to give the organ its final shape. We know little about the cellular and molecular mechanisms that regulate tissue cohesion during morphogenesis. Extensive cell movements underlie eye development, starting with the eye field separating to form bilateral vesicles that go on to evaginate from the forebrain. What keeps eye cells together as they undergo morphogenesis and extensive proliferation is unknown. Here, we show that plexina2 (Plxna2), a member of a receptor family best known for its roles in axon and cell guidance, is required alongside the repellent semaphorin 6a (Sema6a) to keep cells integrated within the zebrafish eye vesicle epithelium. sema6a is expressed throughout the eye vesicle, whereas plxna2 is restricted to the ventral vesicle. Knockdown of Plxna2 or Sema6a results in a loss of vesicle integrity, with time-lapse microscopy showing that eye progenitors either fail to enter the evaginating vesicles or delaminate from the eye epithelium. Explant experiments, and rescue of eye vesicle integrity with simultaneous knockdown of sema6a and plxna2, point to an eye-autonomous requirement for Sema6a/Plxna2. We propose a novel, tissue-autonomous mechanism of organ cohesion, with neutralization of repulsion suggested as a means to promote interactions between cells within a tissue domain.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 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

Citations33
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmentSame topicAxon Guidance and Neuronal SignalingFrench-language works237,207