MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2923290218 · doi:10.1523/eneuro.0086-19.2019

The Expression of Key Guidance Genes at a Forebrain Axon Turning Point Is Maintained by Distinct Fgfr Isoforms but a Common Downstream Signal Transduction Mechanism

2019· article· en· W2923290218 on OpenAlexafffund
Jung‐Lynn Jonathan Yang, Gabriel E. Bertolesi, Stephanie M. Dueck, Carrie L. Hehr, Sarah McFarlane

Bibliographic record

VenueeNeuro · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAxon Guidance and Neuronal Signaling
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Innovates - Health SolutionsGovernment of Canada
KeywordsAxon guidanceBiologyForebrainNeuroscienceFibroblast growth factorFGF8SemaphorinCell biologyGrowth coneSignal transductionNeural developmentAxonGeneticsReceptorGeneCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract During development the axons of neurons grow toward and locate their synaptic partners to form functional neural circuits. Axons do so by reading a map of guidance cues expressed by surrounding tissues. Guidance cues are expressed at a precise space and time, but how guidance cue expression is regulated, and in a coordinated manner, is poorly understood. Semaphorins (Semas) and Slits are families of molecular ligands that guide axons. We showed previously that fibroblast growth factor (Fgf) signaling maintains sema3a and slit1 forebrain expression in Xenopus laevis , and these two repellents cooperate to guide retinal ganglion cell (RGC) axons away from the mid-diencephalon and on towards the optic tectum. Here, we investigate whether there are common features of the regulatory pathways that control the expression of these two guidance cues at this single axon guidance decision point. We isolated the sema3a proximal promoter and confirmed its responsiveness to Fgf signaling. Through misexpression of truncated Fgf receptors (Fgfrs), we found that sema3a forebrain expression is dependent on Fgfr2-4 but not Fgfr1. This is in contrast to slit1 , whose expression we showed previously depends on Fgfr1 but not Fgfr2-4. Using pharmacological inhibitors and misexpression of constitutively active (CA) and dominant negative (DN) signaling intermediates, we find that while distinct Fgfrs regulate these two guidance genes, intracellular signaling downstream of Fgfrs appears to converge along the phosphoinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)-Akt signaling pathway. A common PI3K-Akt signaling pathway may allow for the coordinated expression of guidance cues that cooperate to direct axons at a guidance choice point.

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)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeNeuroSame topicAxon Guidance and Neuronal SignalingFrench-language works237,207