MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323251885 · doi:10.1080/21624054.2016.1146857

Orchestrating A/P and D/V guidance - A Wnt/Netrin tale

2016· article· en· W2323251885 on OpenAlexaff
Naomi Levy-Strumpf

Bibliographic record

VenueWorm · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAxon Guidance and Neuronal Signaling
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNetrinWnt signaling pathwayPolarity (international relations)BiologyCell polarityNeuroscienceFrizzledCell biologyAxon guidanceSignal transductionGeneticsAxonCell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While ample information was gathered in identifying guidance cues and their downstream mediators, very little is known about how the information from multiple extracellular cues is intracellularly to generate normal patterning. Netrin and Wnt signaling pathways play key roles in normal development as well as in malignancies. In C. elegans, as in vertebrates, dorso-ventral (D/V) graded distributions of UNC-6/Netrin and antero-posterior (A/P) graded distributions of Wnts provide instructive polarity information to guide cells and axons along their respective gradients. In this commentary, I will discuss recent findings demonstrating that these 2 signaling pathways also function redundantly to regulate polarity orthogonal to the axis of their gradation. Thus, Wnt signaling components contribute to D/V polarity, while Netrin signaling components contribute to A/P polarity and their joint action collaboratively governs migratory transitions from one axis to the other. These findings pave the way to unraveling broader roles of Wnt and Netrin signaling pathways, roles that are masked due to their redundant nature, and provide a conceptually novel view of how antero-posterior and dorso-ventral guidance mechanisms are orchestrated to establish polarity in multiple biological processes.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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