MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2985796909 · doi:10.7554/elife.26947.042

Author response: Size uniformity of animal cells is actively maintained by a p38 MAPK-dependent regulation of G1-length

2017· peer-review· en· W2985796909 on OpenAlexaff
Shixuan Liu, Miriam B. Ginzberg, Nish Patel, Marc Hild, Bosco Leung, Zhengda Li, Yen‐Chi Chen, Nancy Chang, Yuan Wang, Ceryl Tan, Shulamit Diena, William S. Trimble, Larry Wasserman, Jeremy L. Jenkins, Marc W. Kirschner, Ran Kafri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicFungal and yeast genetics research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyp38 mitogen-activated protein kinasesCellCell sizeCell biologyMAPK/ERK pathwayComputer scienceComputational biologyChemistryGeneticsSignal transduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Animal cells come in many different sizes. In humans, for example, egg cells are thousands of times larger than sperm cells. Yet cells of any given type are often strikingly similar in size. The cells that line the surface of organs including the skin and kidneys are especially uniform; in fact a loss of size uniformity in certain tumors is a sign of malignancy. What kind of regulation could enable separate cells within a tissue to have the same size? One possibility is that each type of cell is programmed with a specific target size, and that a cell can sense if it strays from its target and compensate with longer or shorter periods of growth. Animal cells sensing their own size was first reported in the 1960s, and since then much research in this area has focused on “cell size checkpoints”. These mechanisms stop cells that are too small from progressing through the series of events that allow one cell to divide in two, which is known as the cell cycle. Supporting the existence of size checkpoints, studies in yeast have repeatedly shown that cells that start off smaller tend to grow for longer during stages of cell cycle named G1 and G2. Several researchers have proposed different mechanisms to explain how information about a cell’s starting size influences the length of its cell cycle to result in the negative correlation between these two factors. However, as yet no one had managed to find a way to break this negative correlation, which would greatly help scientists to confirm the actual mechanisms that cells use to sense their size. To address this, Liu, Ginzberg et al. first looked for chemicals that, when added to human cells, stopped cell size from being correlated with the time taken to complete a cell cycle. This search revealed that information about cell size is communicated to regulators of the cell cycle via a signaling pathway that involves an enzyme known as the p38 MAPK. Liu, Ginzberg et al. then showed that this specific pathway is activated in small but not large cells, where it slows the small cells’ progress through the cell cycle. As expected, inhibiting the p38 enzyme also broke down the relationship between time spent in G1 and cell size, and led to the human cells growing to a range of different sizes. These findings now pave the road to answering a fundamental question in cell biology: what is the elusive cell size sensor? Understanding how cells sense their size will open a window onto how quantitative information is programmed, sensed and communicated within living cells. These findings will shed also new light onto how cells specialize into cell types of different sizes, and what happens when cells lose the ability to sense or regulate their size in diseases like cancers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.358
Threshold uncertainty score0.916

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0100.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3580.160

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.314 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFungal and yeast genetics research→French-language works237,207→