Differential actinodin1 regulation in embryonic development and adult fin regeneration in Danio rerio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Actinotrichia are the first exoskeletal elements formed during zebrafish fin development. These rigid fibrils serve as skeletal support for the fin fold and as substrates for mesenchymal cell migration. In the adult intact fins, actinotrichia are restricted to the distal domain of the fin. Following fin amputation, actinotrichia also reform during regeneration. The actinodin gene family codes for structural proteins of actinotrichia. We have previously identified cis-acting regulatory elements in a 2kb genomic region upstream of the first exon of actinodin1, termed 2P, required for tissue-specific expression in the fin fold ectoderm and mesenchyme during embryonic development. Indeed, 2P contains an ectodermal enhancer in a 150bp region named epi. Deletion of epi from 2P results in loss of ectodermal-specific activity. In the present study, we sought to further characterize the activity of these regulatory sequences throughout fin development and during adult fin regeneration. Using a reporter transgenic approach, we show that a site within the epi region, termed epi3, contains an early mesenchymal-specific repressor. We also show that the larval fin fold ectodermal enhancer within epi3 remains functional in the basal epithelial layer during fin regeneration. We show that the first non-coding exon and first intron of actinodin1 contains a transcriptional enhancer and an alternative promoter that are necessary for the persistence of reporter expression reminiscent of actinodin1 expression during adulthood. Altogether, we have identified cis-acting regulatory elements that are required for tissue-specific expression as well as full recapitulation of actinodin1 expression during adulthood. Furthermore, the characterization of these elements provides us with useful molecular tools for the enhancement of transgene expression in adulthood.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".