MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

β‐catenin in the kidney stroma modulates pathways and genes that regulate kidney development

2020· article· en· W3016538198 on OpenAlexaff
Erin Deacon, Anna Li, Felix Boivin, Anna Dvorkin‐Gheva, Joanna Cunanan, Darren Bridgewater

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRenal and related cancers
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStromal cellStromaBiologyCell biologyPopulationCellNephronKidneyCancer researchImmunologyGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kidney development is dependent on proper cell communication between the epithelial, mesenchymal and stromal cell lineages. Recent studies by our laboratory, and others, demonstrate that the renal stroma, a population of fibroblast‐like cells, is required for proper collecting duct and nephron formation. However, how the renal stroma communicates with other cell lineages and contributes to proper kidney development is not well known. β‐catenin is a multifunctional protein involved in cell adhesion and transcriptional regulation. Our previous work demonstrated that stromal β‐catenin alters gene expression and the development of the neighbouring epithelial and mesenchymal cells. However, how stromal β‐catenin regulates stromal communication with the other cell lineages is not well established. We hypothesize that stromal β‐catenin modulates genes and signaling pathways that mediate this cellular communication. To address this hypothesis, we generated mouse models with β‐catenin deficiency ( β‐cat stroma(def) ) or overexpression ( β‐cat stroma(over) ) exclusively in the renal stroma. Wild‐type, β‐cat stroma(def) and β‐cat stroma(over) stromal cells were isolated at E12.5 and E13.5 via fluorescence activated cell sorting (FACS) and were verified by quantitative RT‐PCR to be a pure population of stroma cells. The isolated stromal cells then underwent RNA sequencing (RNA‐seq). The RNA‐seq analysis identified 93 biological processes that were down‐regulated in β‐cat stroma(def) cells at E12.5 and E.13.5, and 491 biological processes that were up‐regulated in β‐cat stroma(over) cells at E12.5 and E13.5. Interestingly, 76% of the biological pathways that were down‐regulated in the β‐cat stroma(def) model at both E12.5 and E13.5 were also up‐regulated in the β‐cat stroma(over) at both time points, strongly suggesting that they are regulated by β‐catenin. Of particular interest to our research were the biological processes that were significantly modulated by stromal β‐catenin and are associated with key kidney developmental processes. Specifically, 8 processes linked to Wnt signaling, 16 processes linked to branching morphogenesis, 5 processes linked to nephrogenesis, and 15 processes linked to angiogenesis. Select differentially expressed candidate genes from these biological pathways were validated by immunohistochemistry, immunofluorescence, or in situ hybridization at E12.5 and E13.5. The RNA‐seq also identified numerous novel candidate β‐catenin target genes with undefined roles in kidney development. Novel genes that were most significantly down‐regulated in the β‐cat stroma(def) cells and/or up‐regulated in the β‐cat stroma(over) at both E12.5 and E13.5 included Emilin2, Atrnl1, Car3, Apcdd1, LHFP, Pitx1, Npy1r, Sttb3, Mctp2, Nkd2, Man1a and Car13 . In conclusion, our results support that stromal β‐catenin plays a significant role in regulating multiple major kidney developmental processes, including branching morphogenesis, nephrogenesis and angiogenesis. Support or Funding Information NSERC, CIHR, KFOC

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.191 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicRenal and related cancersFrench-language works237,207