Fusion pore dynamics of large secretory vesicles define a distinct mechanism of exocytosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exocrine cells utilize large secretory vesicles (LSVs) up to 10 μm in diameter. LSVs fuse with the apical surface, often recruiting actomyosin to extrude their content through dynamic fusion pores. The molecular mechanism regulating pore dynamics remains largely uncharacterized. We observe that the fusion pores of LSVs in the Drosophila larval salivary glands expand, stabilize, and constrict. Arp2/3 is essential for pore expansion and stabilization, while myosin II is essential for pore constriction. We identify several Bin-Amphiphysin-Rvs (BAR) homology domain proteins that regulate fusion pore expansion and stabilization. We show that the I-BAR protein Missing-in-Metastasis (MIM) localizes to the fusion site and is essential for pore expansion and stabilization. The MIM I-BAR domain is essential but not sufficient for localization and function. We conclude that MIM acts in concert with actin, myosin II, and additional BAR-domain proteins to control fusion pore dynamics, mediating a distinct mode of exocytosis, which facilitates actomyosin-dependent content release that maintains apical membrane homeostasis during secretion.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".