Coordination of signaling and tissue mechanics during morphogenesis of murine intestinal villi: a role for mitotic cell rounding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Efficient digestion and absorption of nutrients by the intestine requires a very large apical surface area, a feature that is enhanced by the presence of villi, fingerlike epithelial projections that extend into the lumen. Prior to villus formation, the epithelium is a thick pseudostratified layer. In mice, villus formation begins at embryonic day (E)14.5, when clusters of mesenchymal cells form just beneath the thick epithelium. At this time, analysis of the flat lumenal surface reveals a regular pattern of short apical membrane invaginations that form in regions of the epithelium that lie in between the mesenchymal clusters. Apical invaginations begin in the proximal intestine and spread distally, deepening with time. Interestingly, mitotically rounded cells are frequently associated with these invaginations. These mitotic cells are located at the tips of the invaginating membrane (internalized within the epithelium), rather than adjacent to the apical surface. Further investigation of epithelial changes during membrane invagination reveals that epithelial cells located between mesenchymal clusters experience a circumferential compression, as epithelial cells above each cluster shorten and widen. Using a computational model, we examined whether such forces are sufficient to cause apical invaginations. Simulations and in vivo data reveal that proper apical membrane invagination involves intraepithelial compressive forces, mitotic cell rounding in the compressed regions and apico-basal contraction of the dividing cell. Together, these data establish a new model that explains how signaling events intersect with tissue forces to pattern apical membrane invaginations that define the villus boundaries.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".