MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4233150866 · doi:10.3410/f.8990957.9919054

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Fat cells reactivate quiescent neuroblasts via TOR and glial insulin relays in Drosophila.

2011· dataset· en· W4233150866 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yuh Nung Jan, Jill Wildonger

Bibliographic record

VenueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · 2011
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of GeneticsMedical Research Council
KeywordsNeuroblastBiologyCell biologyProgenitor cellNeural stem cellNeurogenesisNeuroscienceStem cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many stem, progenitor and cancer cells undergo periods of mitotic quiescence from which they can be reactivated [1][2][3][4][5] .The signals triggering entry into and exit from this reversible dormant state are not well understood.In the developing Drosophila central nervous system (CNS), multipotent self-renewing progenitors called neuroblasts [6][7][8][9] undergo quiescence in a stereotypical spatiotemporal pattern 10 .Entry into quiescence is regulated by Hox proteins and an internal neuroblast timer [11][12][13] .Exit from quiescence (reactivation) is subject to a nutritional checkpoint requiring dietary amino acids 14 .Organ co-cultures also implicate an unidentified signal from an adipose/hepatic-like tissue called fat body 14 .Here, we provide in vivo evidence that Slimfast amino-acid sensing and Target-of-Rapamycin (TOR) signalling 15 activate a fat-body derived signal (FDS) required for neuroblast reactivation.Downstream of the FDS, Insulin-like receptor (InR) signalling and the Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase (PI3K)/TOR network are required in neuroblasts for exit from quiescence.We demonstrate that nutritionally regulated glial cells provide the source of Insulin-like Peptides (Ilps) relevant for timely neuroblast reactivation but not for overall larval growth.Conversely, Ilps secreted into the hemolymph by median neurosecretory cells (mNSCs) systemically control organismal size [16][17][18] but do not reactivate neuroblasts.Drosophila thus contains two segregated Ilp pools, one regulating proliferation within the CNS and the other controlling tissue growth systemically.Together, our findings support a model in which amino acids trigger the cell cycle re-entry of neural progenitors via a fat body→glia→neuroblasts relay.This mechanism highlights that dietary nutrients and remote organs, as well as local niches, are key regulators of transitions in stem-cell behaviour.In fed larvae, Drosophila neuroblasts (Fig. 1a) exit quiescence from the late first instar (L1) stage onwards.This reactivation involves cell enlargement and entry into S-phase, monitored in this study using the thymidine analogue, 5-ethynyl-2′-deoxyuridine (EdU).Consistent with a previous study 10 , we observed that reactivated neuroblast lineages (neuroblasts and their progeny, Fig 1b) reproducibly incorporated EdU in a characteristic spatiotemporal sequence: central brain (CB) → thoracic (Th) → abdominal (Ab) neuromeres (Fig. 1c and Supplementary Fig. 1).Mushroom-body neuroblasts (MB NBs) and one ventrolateral neuroblast, however, are known not to undergo quiescence and to continue dividing for several days in the absence of dietary amino acids 14 (Fig. 1a,c,f).This indicates that dietary amino acids are more than mere "fuel", providing a specific signal that reactivates neuroblasts.However, explanted CNSs incubated with amino acids do not * To whom correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to A.P.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4790.258

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.297 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature→Same topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research→French-language works237,207→