Mitogenic action of hypoxia upon cutaneous neuroepithelial cells in developing zebrafish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT In zebrafish, cutaneous neuroepithelial cells (NECs) contain serotonin (5‐HT) and are believed to initiate physiological and behavioral responses to hypoxia during embryonic and early larval development, when mature gills and O2 chemoreceptors are not yet present. The number of skin NECs rapidly declines as embryos develop into larvae, but acclimation to hypoxia leads to retention of a greater number of these cells. We hypothesized that reduction of the partial pressure of oxygen (PO2) in water would stimulate mitosis in cutaneous NECs in zebrafish. Zebrafish were exposed to 5‐bromo‐2′‐deoxyuridine (BrdU) and immunolabeled with antibodies against serotonin and BrdU to identify mitotic skin cells, including NECs. Cells were imaged and quantified using confocal microscopy. From embryonic to larval stages, we observed an overall increase in the number of BrdU‐positive cells in the skin, but a decrease in BrdU‐positive serotonergic NECs. Exposure of larvae to hypoxia (PO2 = 30 mmHg) in vivo for 24 h produced a 1.7‐fold increase in the number of NECs labeled with BrdU. We conclude that under normal environmental PO2 the population of cutaneous NECs declines due to a decrease in mitotic activity. During environmental hypoxia, the number of NECs undergoing cell division in the skin is increased, and this promotes retention of NECs under these conditions. These data demonstrate the direct action of hypoxia upon the cell cycle of cutaneous NECs in developing zebrafish, and support the notion that cutaneous NECs are embryonic O2 chemoreceptors. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Develop Neurobiol 77: 789–801, 2017
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".