A coordinated progression of progenitor cell states initiates urinary tract development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The kidney and upper urinary tract develop through reciprocal interactions between the ureteric bud and the surrounding mesenchyme. Ureteric bud branching forms the arborized collecting duct system of the kidney, while ureteric tips promote nephron formation from dedicated progenitor cells. While nephron progenitor cells are relatively well characterized, the origin of ureteric bud progenitors has received little attention so far. It is well established that the ureteric bud is induced from the nephric duct, an epithelial duct derived from the intermediate mesoderm of the embryo. However, the cell state transitions underlying the progression from intermediate mesoderm to nephric duct and ureteric bud remain unknown. Here we show that nephric duct morphogenesis results from the coordinated organization of four major progenitor cell populations. Using single cell RNA-seq and Cluster RNA-seq, we show that these progenitors emerge in time and space according to a stereotypical pattern. We identify the transcription factors Tfap2a/b and Gata3 as critical coordinators of this progenitor cell progression. This study provides a better understanding of the cellular origin of the renal collecting duct system and associated urinary tract developmental diseases, which may inform guided differentiation of functional kidney tissue.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".