MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315779490 · doi:10.1038/s41589-022-01225-x

Macroscopic quorum sensing sustains differentiating embryonic stem cells

2023· article· en· W4315779490 on OpenAlexafffund
Hirad Daneshpour, Pim van den Bersselaar, Chun-Hao Chao, Thomas G. Fazzio, Hyun Youk

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Chemical Biology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMolecular Communication and Nanonetworks
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsMulticellular organismEmbryonic stem cellQuorum sensingCell biologyBiologyPopulationStem cellSecretionSIGNAL (programming language)CellBiological systemChemistryComputer scienceGeneticsBiochemistryBiofilm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cells can secrete molecules that help each other's replication. In cell cultures, chemical signals might diffuse only within a cell colony or between colonies. A chemical signal's interaction length-how far apart interacting cells are-is often assumed to be some value without rigorous justifications because molecules' invisible paths and complex multicellular geometries pose challenges. Here we present an approach, combining mathematical models and experiments, for determining a chemical signal's interaction length. With murine embryonic stem (ES) cells as a testbed, we found that differentiating ES cells secrete FGF4, among others, to communicate over many millimeters in cell culture dishes and, thereby, form a spatially extended, macroscopic entity that grows only if its centimeter-scale population density is above a threshold value. With this 'macroscopic quorum sensing', an isolated macroscopic, but not isolated microscopic, colony can survive differentiation. Our integrated approach can determine chemical signals' interaction lengths in generic multicellular communities.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature Chemical BiologySame topicMolecular Communication and NanonetworksFrench-language works237,207