Multiscale quantification of tissue behavior during amniote embryo axis elongation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Embryonic axis extension is a complex multi-tissue morphogenetic process responsible for the formation of the posterior part of the amniote body. Cells located in the caudal part of the embryo divide and rearrange to participate in the elongation of the different embryonic tissues (e.g. neural tube, axial and paraxial mesoderm, lateral plate, ectoderm, endoderm). We previously identified the paraxial mesoderm as a crucial player of axis elongation, but how movements and growth are coordinated between the different posterior tissues to drive morphogenesis remain largely unknown. Here we use the quail embryo as a model system to quantify cell behavior and movements in the various tissues of the elongating embryo. We first quantify the tissue-specific contribution to axis elongation by using 3D volumetric techniques, then quantify tissue-specific parameters such as cell density and proliferation at different embryonic stages. To be able to study cell behavior at a multi-tissue scale we used high-resolution 4D imaging of transgenic quail embryos expressing constitutively expressed fluorescent proteins. We developed specific tracking and image analysis techniques to analyze cell motion and compute tissue deformations in 4D. This analysis reveals extensive sliding between tissues during axis extension. Further quantification of “tissue tectonics” showed patterns of rotations, contractions and expansions, which are coherent with the multi-tissue behavior observed previously. Our results confirm the central role of the PSM in axis extension; we propose that the PSM specific cell proliferation and migration programs control the coordination of elongation between tissues during axis extension.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".