Quantitative videomicroscopy reveals latent control of cell-pair rotations <i>in vivo</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Collective cell rotations are widely used during animal organogenesis. Theoretical and in vitro studies have conceptualized rotating cells as identical rigid-point objects that stochastically break symmetry to move monotonously and perpetually within an inert environment. However, it is unclear whether this notion can be extrapolated to a natural context, where rotations are ephemeral and heterogeneous cellular cohorts interact with an active epithelium. In zebrafish neuromasts, nascent sibling hair cells invert positions by rotating ≤180° around their geometric center after acquiring different identities via Notch1a-mediated asymmetric repression of Emx2. Here, we show that this multicellular rotation is a three-phasic movement that progresses via coherent homotypic coupling and heterotypic junction remodeling. We found no correlation between rotations and epithelium-wide cellular flow or anisotropic resistive forces. Moreover, the Notch/Emx2 status of the cell dyad does not determine asymmetric interactions with the surrounding epithelium. Aided by computer modeling, we suggest that initial stochastic inhomogeneities generate a metastable state that poises cells to move and spontaneous intercellular coordination of the resulting instabilities enables persistently directional rotations, whereas Notch1a-determined symmetry breaking buffers rotational noise.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".