MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025311113 · doi:10.1242/dev.183061

Development of vascular regulation in the zebrafish embryo

2020· article· en· W3025311113 on OpenAlexafffund
Nabila Bahrami, Sarah J. Childs

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicZebrafish Biomedical Research Applications
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Children's Hospital Research InstituteHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsPericyteMural cellBiologyZebrafishVascular smooth muscleCell biologyAnatomyBlood vesselConstrictionContraction (grammar)EndocrinologySmooth muscleIn vitroEndothelial stem cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The thin endothelial wall of a newly formed vessel is under enormous stress at the onset of blood flow, rapidly acquiring support from mural cells (pericytes and vascular smooth muscle cells; vSMCs) during development. Mural cells then develop vasoactivity (contraction and relaxation) but we have little information as to when this first develops or the extent to which pericytes and vSMCs contribute. For the first time, we determine the dynamic developmental acquisition of vasoactivity in vivo in the cerebral vasculature of zebrafish. We show that pericyte-covered vessels constrict in response to α1-adrenergic receptor agonists and dilate in response to nitric oxide donors at 4 days postfertilization (dpf) but have heterogeneous responses later, at 6 dpf. In contrast, vSMC-covered vessels constrict at 6 dpf, and dilate at both stages. Using genetic ablation, we demonstrate that vascular constriction and dilation is an active response. Our data suggest that both pericyte- and vSMC-covered vessels regulate their diameter in early development, and that their relative contributions change over developmental time.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.626
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations41
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmentSame topicZebrafish Biomedical Research ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207