MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906135821 · doi:10.1101/504548

Elongated cells drive morphogenesis in a surface-wrapped finite element model of germband retraction

2018· preprint· en· W2906135821 on OpenAlexfundno aff
W. Tyler McCleery, J. Veldhuis, G. Wayne Brodland, Monica Elaine Bennett, M. Shane Hutson

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCellular Mechanics and Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMorphogenesisConvergent extensionGastrulationBiologyCell biologyEmbryoBiophysicsEmbryogenesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT During Drosophila embryogenesis, the germband first extends to curl around the posterior end of the embryo, and then retracts back; however, retraction is not simply the reversal of extension. At a tissue level, extension is coincident with ventral furrow formation, and at a cellular level, extension occurs via convergent cell neighbor exchanges in the germband while retraction involves only changes in cell shape. To understand how cell shapes, tissue organization and cellular forces drive germband retraction, we investigate this process using a whole-embryo, surface-wrapped cellular finite element model. This model represents two key epithelial tissues – amnioserosa and germband – as adjacent sheets of 2D cellular finite elements that are wrapped around an ellipsoidal 3D approximation of an embryo. The model reproduces the detailed kinematics of in vivo retraction by fitting just one free model parameter, the tension along germband cell interfaces; all other cellular forces are constrained to follow ratios inferred from experimental observations. With no additional parameter adjustments, the model also reproduces failures of retraction when amnioserosa cells are removed to mimic U-shaped mutants or laser-microsurgery experiments. Surprisingly, retraction in the model is robust to changes in cellular force values, but is critically dependent on starting from a configuration with highly elongated amnioserosa cells. Their extreme cellular elongation is established during the prior process of germband extension and is then used to drive retraction. The amnioserosa is the one tissue whose cellular morphogenesis is reversed in germband extension and retraction – serving as a store of morphological information that coordinates the forces needed to retract the germband back to its pre-extension position and shape. In this case, and perhaps more generally, cellular force strengths are less important than the carefully established cell shapes that direct them.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicCellular Mechanics and InteractionsFrench-language works237,207