MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2510220479 · doi:10.1098/rsfs.2016.0032

A mathematical model of GTPase pattern formation during single-cell wound repair

2016· review· en· W2510220479 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInterface Focus · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBiocrusts and Microbial Ecology
Canadian institutionsBC StudiesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesIsaac Newton Institute for Mathematical SciencesEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDivision of Mathematical SciencesNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCDC42GTPaseCell biologyProtein kinase CEffectorMotilityGuanosineCrosstalkPAK1ChemistryGTPase-activating proteinCell polarityRAC1BiologyBiophysicsKinaseCellSignal transductionBiochemistryG proteinPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rho GTPases are regulatory proteins whose patterns on the surface of a cell affect cell polarization, cell motility and repair of single-cell wounds. The stereotypical patterns formed by two such proteins, Rho and Cdc42, around laser-injured frog oocytes permit experimental analysis of GTPase activation, inactivation, segregation and crosstalk. Here, we review the development and analysis of a spatial model of GTPase dynamics that describe the formation of concentric zones of Rho and Cdc42 activity around wounds, and describe how this model has provided insights into the roles of the GTPase effector molecules protein kinase C (PKCβ and PKCη) and guanosine nucleotide dissociation inhibitor (GDI) in the wound response. We further demonstrate how the use of a 'sharp switch' model approximation in combination with bifurcation analysis can aid mapping the model behaviour in parameter space (approximate results confirmed with numerical simulation methods). Using these methods in combination with experimental manipulation of PKC activity (PKC overexpression (OE) and dominant negative conditions), we have shown that: (i) PKCβ most probably acts by enhancing existing positive feedbacks (from Rho to itself via the guanosine nucleotide exchange factor domain of Abr, and from Cdc42 to itself), (ii) PKCη most probably increases basal rates of inactivation (or possibly decreases basal rates of activation) of Rho and Cdc42, and (iii) the graded distribution of PKCη and its effect on initial Rho activity accounts for inversion of zones in a fraction (20%) of PKCη OE cells. Finally, we speculate that GDIs (which sequester GTPases) may have a critical role in defining the spatial domain, where the wound response may occur. This paper provides a more thorough exposition of the methods of analysis used in the investigation, whereas previous work on this topic was addressed to biologists and abbreviated such discussion.

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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.825

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.210 · 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