A point mutation in <i>Ttc26</i> causes lumbar spinal cord fusion and synchronous hind-limb locomotion in <i>hop</i> mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Identifying the spinal circuits controlling locomotion is critical for unravelling the mechanisms controlling the production of gaits. Development of the circuits governing left-right coordination relies on axon guidance molecules such as ephrins and netrins. To date, no other class of proteins have been shown to play a role during this process. Here we have analyzed hop mice, which walk with a characteristic hopping gait using their hind legs in synchrony. Fictive locomotion experiments suggest that a local defect in the ventral spinal cord contributes to the aberrant locomotor phenotype. Hop mutant spinal cords had severe morphological defects, including the absence of the ventral midline and a poorly defined border between white and grey matter. The hop mice represent the first model where the left and right central pattern generators (CPGs) are fused to form one central CPG, with a synchronous gait as a functional consequence. These defects were exclusively found in the lumbar domain and were associated with abnormal developmental processes, including a misplaced notochord and reduced induction of ventral progenitor domains. While the underlying mutation in hop mice has been suggested to lie within Ttc26 , other genes in close vicinity have been associated with gait defects. By replicating the point mutation within Ttc26 , employing CRISPR technology, we observed mice with an identical phenotype, thereby verifying the hop mutation. Thus, we show that the assembly of the lumbar CPG network is dependent on a fully functional TTC26 protein.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".