Single‐cell transcriptomic analysis of small and large wounds reveals the distinct spatial organization of regenerative fibroblasts
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wound-induced hair follicle neogenesis (WIHN) has been an important model to study hair follicle regeneration during wound repair. However, the cellular and molecular components of the dermis that make large wounds more regenerative are not fully understood. Here, we compare and contrast recently published scRNA-seq data of small scarring wounds to wounds that regenerate in hope to elucidate the role of fibroblasts lineages in WIHN. Our analysis revealed an over-representation of the newly identified upper wound fibroblasts in regenerative wound conditions, which express the retinoic acid binding protein Crabp1. This regenerative cell type shares a similar gene signature to the murine papillary fibroblast lineage, which are necessary to support hair follicle morphogenesis and homeostasis. RNA velocity analysis comparing scarring and regenerating wounds revealed the divergent trajectories towards upper and lower wound fibroblasts and that the upper populations were closely associated with the specialized dermal papilla. We also provide analyses and explanation reconciling the inconsistency between the histological lineage tracing and the scRNA-seq data from recent reports investigating large wounds. Finally, we performed a computational test to map the spatial location of upper wound fibroblasts in large wounds which revealed that upper peripheral fibroblasts might harbour equivalent regenerative competence as those in the centre. Overall, our scRNA-seq reanalysis combining multiple samples suggests that upper wound fibroblasts are required for hair follicle regeneration and that papillary fibroblasts may migrate from the wound periphery to the centre during wound re-epithelialization. Moreover, data from this publication are made available on our searchable web resource: https://skinregeneration.org/.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it