MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3168602108 · doi:10.1002/dvdy.379

<i>Tgf‐β</i> superfamily and limb regeneration: <i>Tgf‐β</i> to start and <i>Bmp</i> to end

2021· review· en· W3168602108 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Dynamics · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicTGF-β signaling in diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersInstitute of Musculoskeletal Health and ArthritisNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologyRegeneration (biology)RedevelopmentTransforming growth factorSUPERFAMILYBone morphogenetic proteinCell biologyAnatomyGeneticsGeneEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Axolotls represent a popular model to study how nature solved the problem of regenerating lost appendages in tetrapods. Our work over many years focused on trying to understand how these animals can achieve such a feat and not end up with a scarred up stump. The Tgf-β superfamily represents an interesting family to target since they are involved in wound healing in adults and pattern formation during development. This family is large and comprises Tgf-β, Bmps, activins and GDFs. In this review, we present work from us and others on Tgf-β & Bmps and highlight interesting observations between these two sub-families. Tgf-β is important for the preparation phase of regeneration and Bmps for the redevelopment phase and they do not overlap with one another. We present novel data showing that the Tgf-β non-canonical pathway is also not active during redevelopment. Finally, we propose a molecular model to explain how Tgf-β and Bmps maintain distinct windows of expression during regeneration in axolotls.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.255 · 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