MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4301166582 · doi:10.26443/msurj.v1i1.150

The Mystery of Rhomboid in Capicua mutant Fruit Flies

2006· article· en· W4301166582 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Saleem Hassan, Laura A. Nilson

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill Science Undergraduate Research Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Reproductive Biology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCell biologyDrosophila melanogasterBiologyOocyteRhomboidOogenesisDrosophila (subgenus)Nurse cellEmbryoZona pellucidaEgg cellYolkGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drosophila melanogaster is a fruit fly that is one of the most commonly used animal model for genetic studies.
 Dorsal-ventral (dv) patterning, which is the body plan, of the Drosophila embryo is determined by the asymmetric positioning of different underlying cellular molecules. DV patterning of the Drosophila embryo is established well before fertilisation. The Drosophila egg develop within a cluster of cells consisting of an oocyte interconnected with fifteen sister nurse cells, which function as a source of RNAs and proteins for the developing oocyte and degenerate by the end of oogenesis. Surrounding this cluster is an epithelium of follicle cells, which provide yolk and secrete the eggshell (Fig1).
 Initial dv asymmetry is established at mid oogenesis and the information is then passed on to the surrounding follicle cells (3). The protein gurken (grk), in the oocyte, provides the initial polarizing signal to initiate the formation of the eventual polarity of the egg, and activates Drosophila epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signaling in the dorsal follicle cells. Through positive and negative feedback mechanisms, this EGF signaling is refined and defines a precise pattern of cell fates within the follicular epithelium (3). This specific definition of fates will be used as a basis to understand the effects of the gene capicua (cic) on follicle cell fate patterning.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMcGill Science Undergraduate Research JournalSame topicPlant Reproductive BiologyFrench-language works237,207