MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3093197380 · doi:10.1101/2020.10.14.339556

Cell size homeostasis is maintained by a circuitry involving a CDK4-determined target size that programs the cell size-dependent activation of p38

2020· preprint· en· W3093197380 on OpenAlexafffund
Ceryl Tan, Miriam B. Ginzberg, Rachel Webster, Seshu Iyengar, Shixuan Liu, John Concannon, Yuan Wang, Douglas S. Auld, Jeremy L. Jenkins, Hannes Röst, Andreas Hilfinger, W. Brent Derry, Nish Patel, Ran Kafri

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsCell sizemTORC1CellCell biologyCell growthBiologyCell cycleGenome sizeSignal transductionGeneticsGenomeGenePI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY While molecules that promote the growth of animal cells have been identified, the following question remains: How are growth promoting pathways regulated to specify a characteristic size for each of the different cell types? In 1975, Hartwell and Nurse suggested that in eukaryotes, cell size is determined by size checkpoints – mechanisms that restrict cell cycle progression from cells that are smaller than their target size . Curiously, such checkpoint mechanisms imply a conceptual distinction between a cell’s actual size and cell’s target size. In the present study, we materialize this conceptual distinction by describing experimental assays that discriminately quantify a cell’s target size value. With these assays, we show that a cell’s size and target size are distinct phenotypes that are subject to different upstream regulators. While mTORC1 promotes growth in cell size, our data suggests that a cell’s target size value is regulated by other pathways including FGFR3, ROCK2, and CDK4. For example, while rapamycin (an mTORC1 inhibitor) decreases cell size, rapamycin does not change the target size that is required for the G1/S transition. The CDK4/Rb pathway has been previously proposed as a putative regulator of target size. Yet, in lacking experimental means that discriminate perturbations of cell growth from perturbations that reprogram target size, such claims on target size were not validated. To investigate the functions of CDK4 in target size determination, we used genetic and chemical means to ‘dial’ higher and lower levels of CDK4 activity. These measurements identified functions of CDK4 on target size that are distinct from other G1 CDKs. Using C. elegans , we further demonstrate that these influences of CDK4 on size determination function in vivo . Finally, we propose a model whereby mTORC1, p38, and CDK4 cooperate in a manner that is analogous to the function of a thermostat. While mTORC1 promotes cellular growth as prompted by p38, CDK4 is analogous to the thermostat dial that sets the critical target size associated with cell size homeostasis.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms→French-language works237,207→