MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167994617 · doi:10.1091/mbc.e08-06-0665

CLASP Modulates Microtubule-Cortex Interaction during Self-Organization of Acentrosomal Microtubules

2008· article· en· W2167994617 on OpenAlexafffund
Chris Ambrose, Geoffrey O. Wasteneys

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology of the Cell · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchArizona Biomedical Research CommissionUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsMicrotubuleBiologyCell cortexCell biologyAstral microtubulesCortex (anatomy)CytoplasmCytoplasmic streamingBiophysicsCentrosomeCellCytoskeletonNeuroscienceBiochemistryCell cycle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CLASP proteins associate with either the plus ends or sidewalls of microtubules depending on the subcellular location and cell type. In plant cells, CLASP's distribution along the full length of microtubules corresponds with the uniform anchorage of microtubules to the cell cortex. Using live cell imaging, we show here that loss of CLASP in Arabidopsis thaliana results in partial detachment of microtubules from the cortex. The detached portions undergo extensive waving, distortion, and changes in orientation, particularly when exposed to the forces of cytoplasmic streaming. These deviations from the normal linear polymerization trajectories increase the likelihood of intermicrotubule encounters that are favorable for subsequent bundle formation. Consistent with this, cortical microtubules in clasp-1 leaf epidermal cells are hyper-parallel. On the basis of these data, we identify a novel mechanism where modulation of CLASP activity governs microtubule-cortex attachment, thereby contributing to self-organization of cortical microtubules.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.676

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations120
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology of the CellSame topicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamicsFrench-language works237,207