Cross-linkers both drive and brake cytoskeletal remodeling and furrowing in cytokinesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cell shape changes such as cytokinesis are driven by the actomyosin contractile cytoskeleton. The molecular rearrangements that bring about contractility in nonmuscle cells are currently debated. Specifically, both filament sliding by myosin motors, as well as cytoskeletal cross-linking by myosins and nonmotor cross-linkers, are thought to promote contractility. Here we examined how the abundance of motor and nonmotor cross-linkers affects the speed of cytokinetic furrowing. We built a minimal model to simulate contractile dynamics in the Caenorhabditis elegans zygote cytokinetic ring. This model predicted that intermediate levels of nonmotor cross-linkers are ideal for contractility; in vivo, intermediate levels of the scaffold protein anillin allowed maximal contraction speed. Our model also demonstrated a nonlinear relationship between the abundance of motor ensembles and contraction speed. In vivo, thorough depletion of nonmuscle myosin II delayed furrow initiation, slowed F-actin alignment, and reduced maximum contraction speed, but partial depletion allowed faster-than-expected kinetics. Thus, cytokinetic ring closure is promoted by moderate levels of both motor and nonmotor cross-linkers but attenuated by an over-abundance of motor and nonmotor cross-linkers. Together, our findings extend the growing appreciation for the roles of cross-linkers in cytokinesis and reveal that they not only drive but also brake cytoskeletal remodeling.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".