MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The role of cytoskeleton regulators in embryonic facial morphogenesis

2022· article· en· W4225394312 on OpenAlexafffund
Isra Ibrahim, Joy M. Richman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMorphogenesisCell biologyEmbryonic stem cellCytoskeletonBiologyAnatomyGeneticsGeneCell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small GTPases are downstream of the non‐canonical WNT JNK‐PCP pathway. The most well studied members of this group are RhoA, Rac1 and CDC42. These small GTPases regulate cell shape, orientation, and migration through regulating the actomyosin cytoskeleton. In addition, components of this pathway have been linked to non‐syndromic cleft lip with or without cleft palate. The objective of this study is to test whether small GTPase signaling is required and sufficient for facial morphogenesis at stages where lip fusion is taking place. Methods The faces of E4.5 chicken embryos were dissected to include the two facial processes involved in lip fusion, the frontonasal and maxillary processes (Fig. 1). After a dose‐response experiment to find the optimal concentrations, the organ cultures were treated with either an antagonist of RhoA signaling (ROCKi 20µM) or an antagonist of Rac1 (Rac1i 100µM) or an agonist (RhoA/ Rac1/CDC42 activator 0.5µg/ml). Organ cultures were photographed and measured at 0 and 24hrs. Percentage growth differences were analyzed using Prism Graphpad software (v. 9.2). Results In the control cultures, frontonasal mass width decreased by 23% and increased in cranio‐caudal height by 17% over 24‐hour period. The nasal slits did not change. The maxillary prominences increased in height and width by 12% and 37% respectively over 24‐hour period similar to growth in vivo. The ROCKi treated cultures prevented the narrowing of the frontonasal mass and increased the length of the nasal slits. ROCKi treatment had no effect on the height of the frontonasal mass nor maxillary prominences. In contrast, the RAC1i had no effect on facial growth. The agonist significantly reduced frontonasal mass width compared to ROCKi. In addition, the agonist significantly decreased growth of the maxillary prominences. Conclusions The changes in facial morphogenesis may be explained by active cytoskeletal remodeling, particularly in the RhoA pathway. We excluded a requirement for RAC1 in facial morphogenesis in our system. Our data also suggest that different regions of the face have different requirements for specific small GTPase signaling. The frontonasal mass is dependent on RhoA signaling but not the maxillary prominences. Over activation of all GTPases shows that correct levels are necessary for normal morphogenesis. Overall, we have revealed a complex interplay between small GTPAses in midfacial morphogenesis.

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 score0.004

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicBiomedical Ethics and RegulationFrench-language works237,207