Crumbs and the apical spectrin cytoskeleton regulate R8 cell fate in the Drosophila eye
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Hippo pathway is an important regulator of organ growth and cell fate. In the R8 photoreceptor cells of the Drosophila melanogaster eye, the Hippo pathway controls the fate choice between one of two subtypes that express either the blue light-sensitive Rhodopsin 5 (Hippo inactive R8 subtype) or the green light-sensitive Rhodopsin 6 (Hippo active R8 subtype). The degree to which the mechanism of Hippo signal transduction and the proteins that mediate it are conserved in organ growth and R8 cell fate choice is currently unclear. Here, we identify Crumbs and the apical spectrin cytoskeleton as regulators of R8 cell fate. By contrast, other proteins that influence Hippo-dependent organ growth, such as the basolateral spectrin cytoskeleton and Ajuba, are dispensable for the R8 cell fate choice. Surprisingly, Crumbs promotes the Rhodopsin 5 cell fate, which is driven by Yorkie, rather than the Rhodopsin 6 cell fate, which is driven by Warts and the Hippo pathway, which contrasts with its impact on Hippo activity in organ growth. Furthermore, neither the apical spectrin cytoskeleton nor Crumbs appear to regulate the Hippo pathway through mechanisms that have been observed in growing organs. Together, these results show that only a subset of Hippo pathway proteins regulate the R8 binary cell fate decision and that aspects of Hippo signalling differ between growing organs and post-mitotic R8 cells.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".