Physical constraints on the positions and dimensions of the zebrafish swim bladder by surrounding bones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Precise regulation of organ size and position is crucial for optimal organ function. Since the swim bladder is primarily responsible for buoyancy in teleosts, early development and subsequent inflation of the swim bladder should be appropriately controlled with the body growth. However, the underlying mechanism remains unclear. In this study, we show that the size and position of the swim bladder are physically constrained by the surrounding bones in zebrafish. Non-invasive micro-CT scanning revealed that the anterior edge of the swim bladder is largely attached to the os suspensorium, which is an ossicle extending medioventrally from the 4th centrum. Additionally, we observed that hoxc6a mutants, which lack the os suspensorium, exhibited an anterior projection of the swim bladder beyond the 4th vertebra. During the swim bladder development, we found that the counterclockwise rotation of the os suspensorium correlates with posterior regression of the swim bladder, suggesting that the os suspensorium pushes the swim bladder posteriorly into its proper position. Furthermore, our results revealed a close association between the posterior region of the swim bladder and the pleural ribs. In hoxaa cluster mutants with additional ribs, the swim bladder expanded posteriorly, accompanied by an enlarged body cavity. Taken together, our results demonstrate the importance of the surrounding bones in the robust regulation of swim bladder size and position in zebrafish.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".