MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3151575369 · doi:10.1523/eneuro.0053-21.2021

Retinal Pigment Epithelium and Neural Retinal Progenitors Interact via Semaphorin 6D to Facilitate Optic Cup Morphogenesis

2021· article· en· W3151575369 on OpenAlexafffund
Paula Bernice Cechmanek, Carrie L. Hehr, Sarah McFarlane

Bibliographic record

VenueeNeuro · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta InnovatesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsMorphogenesisBiologyRetinaZebrafishCell biologyRetinal pigment epitheliumEmbryonic stem cellOptic cup (embryology)RetinalCell migrationNeuroscienceCellEye developmentGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cell movement propels embryonic tissues to acquire shapes required for mature function. The movements are driven both by acto-myosin signaling and by cells interacting with the extracellular matrix (ECM). Unknown is whether cell-cell interactions within a tissue are also required, and the molecular mechanisms by which such communication might occur. Here, we use the developing visual system of zebrafish as a model to understand the role cell-cell communication plays in tissue morphogenesis in the embryonic nervous system. We identify that cell-cell-mediated contact between two distinct cell populations, progenitors of the neural retina and retinal pigment epithelium (RPE), facilitates epithelial flow to produce the mature cupped retina. We identify for the first time the need in eye morphogenesis for distinct populations of progenitors to interact, and suggest a novel role for a member of a key developmental signaling family, the transmembrane Semaphorin6d, as mediating communication between distinct cell types to control tissue morphogenesis.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.943

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeNeuroSame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207