MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406799376 · doi:10.1093/genetics/iyaf015

The TRIM-NHL RNA-binding protein MEI-P26 modulates the size of Drosophila Type I neuroblast lineages

2025· article· en· W4406799376 on OpenAlexafffund
Yichao Hu, Xiaohang Yang, Howard D. Lipshitz

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchZhejiang UniversityUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsBiologyEctopic expressionGene knockdownNeuroblastRNA-binding proteinCell biologyRNAGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Drosophila TRIM-NHL RNA-binding protein (RBP), MEI-P26, has previously been shown to suppress tumor formation in the germline. Here we show that, in the Drosophila larval central brain, cell-type-specific expression of MEI-P26 plays a vital role in regulating neural development. MEI-P26 and another TRIM-NHL RBP, Brain tumor (BRAT), have distinct expression patterns in Type I neuroblast (NB) lineages: While both proteins are expressed in NBs, BRAT is expressed in ganglion mother cells (GMCs) but not neurons, whereas MEI-P26 is expressed in neurons but not GMCs. Knockdown of MEI-P26 leads to re-expression of the stem cell marker Deadpan (DPN) and over-production of neurons. In contrast, ectopically expressed MEI-P26 reduces NB lineage size by repressing division of GMCs, resulting in reduced neuron production. We show that MEI-P26 positively regulates expression of Prospero (PROS), a transcription factor that is known to repress cell cycle-related genes. Ectopic expression of PROS phenocopies ectopic expression of MEI-P26. In both cases, Cyclin B (CYCB) expression is downregulated. Importantly, knockdown of PROS in the context of ectopic MEI-P26 rescues the neural lineage. Based on these results, we conclude that MEI-P26 functions to prevent over-production of neurons by promoting production of PROS which, in turn, downregulates cell division.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneticsSame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207