MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892120502 · doi:10.1242/dev.162529

The LPA-LPA4 axis is required for establishment of bipolar morphology and radial migration of newborn cortical neurons

2018· article· en· W2892120502 on OpenAlexafffund
Nobuhiro Kurabayashi, Aiki Tanaka, Minh Dang Nguyen, Kamon Sanada

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMitsubishi FoundationMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyTakeda Science FoundationNaito Foundation
KeywordsBiologyMorphology (biology)Cell biologyAnatomyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Newborn neurons in the developing neocortex undergo radial migration, a process that is coupled with their precise passage from multipolar to bipolar shape. The cell-extrinsic signals that govern this transition are, however, poorly understood. Here, we find that lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) signaling contributes to the establishment of a bipolar shape in mouse migratory neurons through LPA receptor 4 (LPA4). LPA4 is robustly expressed in migratory neurons. LPA4-depleted neurons show impaired multipolar-to-bipolar transition and become arrested in their migration. Further, LPA4-mediated LPA signaling promotes formation of the pia-directed process in primary neurons overlaid on neocortical slices. In addition, LPA4 depletion is coupled with altered actin organization as well as with destabilization of the F-actin-binding protein filamin A (FlnA). Finally, overexpression of FlnA rescues the morphology and migration defects of LPA4-depleted neurons. Thus, the LPA-LPA4 axis regulates bipolar morphogenesis and radial migration of newborn cortical neurons via remodeling of the actin cytoskeleton.

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)0.001
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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmentSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207