Anillin-mediated Targeting of Peanut to Pseudocleavage Furrows Is Regulated by the GTPase Ran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During early development in Drosophila, pseudocleavage furrows in the syncytial embryo prevent contact between neighboring spindles, thereby ensuring proper chromosome segregation. Here we demonstrate that the GTPase Ran regulates pseudocleavage furrow organization. Ran can exert control on pseudocleavage furrows independently of its role in regulating the microtubule cytoskeleton. Disruption of the Ran pathway prevented pseudocleavage furrow formation and restricted the depth and duration of furrow ingression of those pseudocleavage furrows that did form. We found that Ran was required for the localization of the septin Peanut to the pseudocleavage furrow, but not anillin or actin. Biochemical assays revealed that the direct binding of the nuclear transport receptors importin alpha and beta to anillin prevented the binding of Peanut to anillin. Furthermore, RanGTP reversed the inhibitory action of importin alpha and beta. On expression of a mutant form of anillin that lacked an importin alpha and beta binding site, inhibition of Ran no longer restricted the depth and duration of furrow ingression in those pseudocleavage furrows that formed. These data suggest that anillin and Peanut are involved in pseudocleavage furrow ingression in syncytial embryos and that this process is regulated by Ran.
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".