Investigating the Regulation of Stem and Progenitor Cell Mitotic Progression by In Situ Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genome stability relies upon efficacious chromosome congression and regulation by the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC). The study of these fundamental mitotic processes in adult stem and progenitor cells has been limited by the technical challenge of imaging mitosis in these cells in situ. Notably, how broader physiological changes, such as dietary intake or age, affect mitotic progression in stem and/or progenitor cells is largely unknown. Using in situ imaging of C. elegans adult germlines, we describe the mitotic parameters of an adult stem and progenitor cell population in an intact animal. We find that SAC regulation in germline stem and progenitor cells is distinct from that found in early embryonic divisions and is more similar to that of classical tissue culture models. We further show that changes in organismal physiology affect mitotic progression in germline stem and progenitor cells. Reducing dietary intake produces a checkpoint-dependent delay in anaphase onset, and inducing dietary restriction when the checkpoint is impaired increases the incidence of segregation errors in mitotic and meiotic cells. Similarly, developmental aging of the germline stem and progenitor cell population correlates with a decline in the rate of several mitotic processes. These results provide the first in vivo validation of models for SAC regulation developed in tissue culture systems and demonstrate that several fundamental features of mitotic progression in adult stem and progenitor cells are highly sensitive to organismal physiological changes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".