wrt-2 expression oscillates during larval development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
wrt-2 encodes a hedgehog-like protein that is weakly required for molting (Kouns et al., 2011). As monitored using a transcriptional GFP reporter, wrt-2 is expressed in seam and hypodermal cells throughout development (Apock et al., 1999). However, wrt-2 transcript levels oscillate with a period consistent with the timing of the molting cycle (Hendriks et al., 2014). Because standard GFP reporters do not capture rapid changes in gene expression, we generated a wrt-2 transcriptional reporter driving expression of a rapidly degraded GFP (GFP-pest) to observe the precise timing of wrt-2 expression throughout development. Consistent with previous findings, Pwrt-2::GFP-pest expression was observed in hypodermal and seam cells at all larval stages. However, expression was not constant throughout development but rather cycled on and off at each larval stage (Figure 1 B and C). Pwrt-2::GFP-pest expression was first observed in the embryo and turned off at hatching (Figure 1A). Expression ceases at the end of L4 and no expression was observed in adult animals. We confirm that wrt-2 expression oscillates with the molting cycle and demonstrate that these oscillations are driven by the 5’ regulatory region of wrt-2.
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 | 0.001 |
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".