MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Nephron progenitor cell organization and nephrogenesis is dependent on Shroom3

2021· article· en· W3168199456 on OpenAlexafffund
Ashmeet Hunjan, Joanna Cunanan, Ahsan U. Khan, Darren Bridgewater

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRenal and related cancers
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchKidney Foundation of Canada
KeywordsNephronBiologyProgenitor cellCell biologyCytoskeletonActin cytoskeletonCell typeKidneyCellStem cellEndocrinologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The functional unit of the kidney, termed the nephron, develops from specialized mesenchyme cells known as the nephron progenitors. Nephron progenitors must undergo significant cell shape changes to regulate cell migration, cell movements, and cell projection formation during nephrogenesis. These dynamic cellular changes are essential for orientating and organizing the cells for progression through various stages of nephrogenesis to form a proper functioning nephron. The actin cytoskeleton regulates these dynamic morphological changes by interacting with intracellular proteins and their extracellular environment. Shroom3 is an actin‐binding protein that regulates cell shape changes by modulating the actin cytoskeleton. In mice and humans, mutations in Shroom3 are strongly associated with poor nephron function and chronic kidney disease. Our previous work demonstrated unique Shroom3 expression patterns in nephron progenitor cells, yet the function of Shroom3 during nephrogenesis is not known. Here, we investigated functional roles for Shroom3 in nephron progenitor organization during nephrogenesis. Analysis of E13.5 and E18.5 kidney sections from Wildtype and Shroom3 ‐/‐ null mutants demonstrated clustering abnormalities of nephron progenitor cells characterized by large abnormal gaps between cells in Shroom3 mutants. Analysis of Wildtype and Shroom3 ‐/‐ nephron progenitor cell orientation by GM130 and Integrin‐α8 immunofluorescence, markers of cell polarization, displayed altered cell orientation in some but not all cells. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) confirmed that nephron progenitors of Shroom3 ‐/‐ were irregularly shaped, abnormally clustered, and found at large distances from the neighboring epithelium. TEM analysis also revealed several filopodia‐like long and thin actin‐based membrane protrusions from both Wildtype and Shroom3 ‐/‐ nephron progenitors. However, the broad, thick lamellipodia‐like protrusions, found at the leading edge of the cells, were virtually absent from Shroom3 ‐/‐ nephron progenitors. As nephrogenesis proceeds, Wildtype nephron progenitors develop into renal vesicles that consist of a central lumen surrounded by polarized wedge‐shaped epithelial cells, which was not observed in Shroom3 ‐/‐ renal vesicles. These alterations in the early stages of nephrogenesis in Shroom3 ‐/‐ kidneys were also associated with a disruption in the epithelial polarization of mature nephrons demonstrated by irregular Sglt2 and Slc12a3 expression, key ion channels localized to the apical aspect in Wildtype epithelia. Our results demonstrate that Shroom3 is an important regulator of nephron progenitor organization and cell morphology in the earliest stages of nephron formation. It also suggests these abnormalities translate to a poorly polarized nephron epithelium and likely poor nephron function. These studies could explain why mutations in Shroom3 are so highly associated with poor nephron function and chronic kidney disease.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicRenal and related cancers→French-language works237,207→