Microglia are essential for tissue contraction in wound closure after brain injury in zebrafish larvae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wound closure after brain injury is crucial for tissue restoration but remains poorly understood at the tissue level. We investigated this process using in vivo observations of larval zebrafish brain injury. Our findings show that wound closure occurs within the first 24 h through global tissue contraction, as evidenced by live-imaging and drug inhibition studies. Microglia accumulate at the wound site before closure, and computational models suggest that their physical traction could drive this process. Depleting microglia genetically or pharmacologically impairs tissue repair. At the cellular level, live imaging reveals centripetal deformation of astrocytic processes contacted by migrating microglia. Laser severing of these contacts causes rapid retraction of microglial processes and slower retraction of astrocytic processes, indicating tension. Disrupting the lcp1 gene, which encodes the F-actin-stabilising protein L-plastin, in microglia results in failed wound closure. These findings support a mechanical role of microglia in wound contraction and suggest that targeting microglial mechanics could offer new strategies for treating traumatic brain injury.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".