MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4397003240 · doi:10.1142/s0219720024500112

Body plan evolvability: The role of variability in gene regulatory networks

2024· article· en· W4397003240 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander V. Spirov, Ekaterina Myasnikova, David M. Holloway

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Genetics and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvolvabilityBody planGene regulatory networkGenePlan (archaeology)BiologyComputational biologyRegulator geneGeneticsEvolutionary biologyRegulation of gene expressionGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

) development has characterized the degree to which gene regulation networks can be robust to natural variability. In the first few hours of development, broad spatial gradients of maternally derived transcription factors activate embryonic gap genes. These gap patterns determine the subsequent segmented insect body plan through pair-rule gene expression. Gap genes are expressed with greater spatial precision than the maternal patterns. Computational modeling of the gap-gap regulatory interactions provides a mechanistic understanding for this robustness to maternal variability in wild-type (WT) patterning. A long-standing question in evolutionary biology has been how a system which is robust, such as the developmental program creating any particular species' body plan, is also evolvable, i.e. how can a system evolve or speciate, if the WT form is strongly buffered and protected? In the present work, we use the WT model to explore the breakdown of such Waddington-type 'canalization'. What levels of variability will push the system out of the WT form; are there particular pathways in the gene regulatory mechanism which are more susceptible to losing the WT form; and when robustness is lost, what types of forms are most likely to occur (i.e. what forms lie near the WT)? Manipulating maternal effects in several different pathways, we find a common gap 'peak-to-step' pattern transition in the loss of WT. We discuss these results in terms of the evolvability of insect segmentation, and in terms of experimental perturbations and mutations which could test the model predictions. We conclude by discussing the prospects for using continuum models of pattern dynamics to investigate a wider range of evo-devo problems.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.649
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bioinformatics and Computational BiologySame topicAnimal Genetics and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207