Decoding pancreatic endocrine cell differentiation and β cell regeneration in zebrafish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In contrast to mice, zebrafish have an exceptional yet elusive ability to replenish lost β cells in adulthood. Understanding this framework would provide mechanistic insights for β cell regeneration, which may be extrapolated to humans. Here, we characterize a krt4 -expressing ductal cell type, which is distinct from the putative Notch-responsive cells, showing neogenic competence and giving rise to the majority of endocrine cells during postembryonic development. Furthermore, we demonstrate a marked ductal remodeling process featuring a Notch-responsive to krt4 + luminal duct transformation during late development, indicating several origins of krt4 + ductal cells displaying similar transcriptional patterns. Single-cell transcriptomics upon a series of time points during β cell regeneration unveil a previously unrecognized dlb + transitional endocrine precursor cell, distinct regulons, and a differentiation trajectory involving cellular shuffling through differentiation and dedifferentiation dynamics. These results establish a model of zebrafish pancreatic endocrinogenesis and highlight key values of zebrafish for translational studies of β cell regeneration.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".