The functional roles of zebrafish HoxA- and HoxD-related clusters in the pectoral fin development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The paralogs 9–13 Hox genes in mouse HoxA and HoxD clusters are critical for limb development. When both HoxA and HoxD clusters are deleted in mice, significant limb truncation is observed compared to the phenotypes of single and compound mutants of Hox9-13 genes in these clusters. In zebrafish, mutations in hox13 genes in HoxA - and HoxD -related clusters result in abnormal morphology of pectoral fins, homologous to forelimbs. However, the effect of the simultaneous deletions of entire HoxA - and HoxD -related clusters on pectoral fin development remains unknown. Here, we generated mutants with several combinations of hoxaa , hoxab , and hoxda cluster deletions and analyzed the pectoral fin development. In hoxaa −/− ; hoxab −/− ; hoxda −/− larvae, the endoskeletal disc and the fin-fold are significantly shortened in developing pectoral fins. In addition, we show that this anomaly is due to defects in the pectoral fin growth after the fin bud formation. Furthermore, in the surviving adult mutants, micro-CT scanning reveals defects in the posterior portion of the pectoral fin which is thought to represent latent regions of the limb. Our results further support that the functional role of HoxA and HoxD clusters is conserved in the paired appendage formation in bony fishes.
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 | 0.001 | 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".