MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164180422 · doi:10.3389/fcell.2021.640200

Interphase Chromosomes in Replicative Senescence: Chromosome Positioning as a Senescence Biomarker and the Lack of Nuclear Motor-Driven Chromosome Repositioning in Senescent Cells

2021· article· en· W3164180422 on OpenAlexaff
Ishita Mehta, Kumars Riyahi, Rita Torres Pereira, Karen J. Meaburn, Martin Figgitt, Ian R. Kill, Christopher H. Eskiw, Joanna M. Bridger

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelomeres, Telomerase, and Senescence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSenescenceChromosomeBiologyChromosome segregationCell biologyMitosisGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study demonstrates, and confirms, that chromosome territory positioning is altered in primary senescent human dermal fibroblasts (HDFs). The chromosome territory positioning pattern is very similar to that found in HDFs made quiescent either by serum starvation or confluence; but not completely. A few chromosomes are found in different locations. One chromosome in particular stands out, chromosome 10, which is located in an intermediate location in young proliferating HDFs, but is found at the nuclear periphery in quiescent cells and in an opposing location of the nuclear interior in senescent HDFs. We have previously demonstrated that individual chromosome territories can be actively and rapidly relocated, with 15 min, after removal of serum from the culture media. These chromosome relocations require nuclear motor activity through the presence of nuclear myosin 1β (NM1β). We now also demonstrate rapid chromosome movement in HDFs after heat-shock at 42°C. Others have shown that heat shock genes are actively relocated using nuclear motor protein activity via actin or NM1β (Khanna et al., 2014; Pradhan et al., 2020). However, this current study reveals, that in senescent HDFs, chromosomes can no longer be relocated to expected nuclear locations upon these two types of stimuli. This coincides with a entirely different organisation and distribution of NM1β within senescent HDFs.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Cell and Developmental BiologySame topicTelomeres, Telomerase, and SenescenceFrench-language works237,207