Elastic mitotic tethers remain functional after microtubules are inhibited
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT During normal anaphase in animal cells, elastic tethers connect partner telomeres of segregating chromosomes and exert backward (anti-poleward) forces on those chromosomes. The experiments reported herein test whether microtubules need to be present in order for tethers to produce backwards forces. We disassembled spindle microtubules by treating anaphase crane-fly primary spermatocytes separately with nocodazole, colcemid, or podophyllotoxin. The drug treatments caused anaphase chromosomes to stop moving poleward; almost immediately thereafter they moved backward. The characteristics of the backward movements of the half-bivalents match those of the backwards movements of arm fragments formed by cutting chromosome arms during anaphase – for example the occurrence and lengths of backward movements were a function of tether length. The only difference from movement of arm fragments is that the chromosomes in the treated cells moved backwards slower than arm fragments did. Immunofluorescence of spindle tubulin after the drug treatments indicated that acetylated kinetochore microtubules were not depolymerized by the drugs, though the non-kinetochore spindle microtubules were depolymerized. Our data indicate that tethers move anaphase chromosomes backwards in the absence of functioning spindle microtubules. We suggest that the backward movements that take place when poleward forces are absent are due to tethers, and that the backward movements are slowed by the presence of acetylated kinetochore microtubules.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".