Pioneer midbrain longitudinal axons navigate using a balance of Netrin attraction and Slit repulsion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Longitudinal axons grow parallel to the embryonic midline to connect distant regions of the central nervous system. Previous studies suggested that repulsive midline signals guide pioneer longitudinal axons by blocking their entry into the floor plate; however, the role of midline attractants, and whether attractant signals may cooperate with repulsive signals, remains unclear. In this study we investigated the navigation of a set of pioneer longitudinal axons, the medial longitudinal fasciculus, in mouse embryos mutant for the Netrin/Deleted in Colorectal Cancer (DCC) attractants, and for Slit repellents, as well as the responses of explanted longitudinal axons in vitro. RESULTS: In mutants for Netrin1 chemoattractant or DCC receptor signaling, longitudinal axons shifted away from the ventral midline, suggesting that Netrin1/DCC signals act attractively to pull axons ventrally. Analysis of mutants in the three Slit genes, including Slit1/2/3 triple mutants, suggest that concurrent repulsive Slit/Robo signals push pioneer axons away from the ventral midline. Combinations of mutations between the Netrin and Slit guidance systems provided genetic evidence that the attractive and repulsive signals balance against each other. This balance is demonstrated in vitro using explant culture, finding that the cues can act directly on longitudinal axons. The explants also reveal an unexpected synergy of Netrin1 and Slit2 that promotes outgrowth. CONCLUSIONS: These results support a mechanism in which longitudinal trajectories are positioned by a push-pull balance between opposing Netrin and Slit signals. Our evidence suggests that longitudinal axons respond directly and simultaneously to both attractants and repellents, and that the combined signals constrain axons to grow longitudinally.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".