MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413100323 · doi:10.1016/j.ydbio.2025.08.005

Building bridges for oocyte growth: regulation of C. elegans germline architecture and function by oriented cell divisions

2025· article· en· W4413100323 on OpenAlexafffund
Réda M. Zellag, Kimia Zarnani, Abigail R. Gerhold, Jean‐Claude Labbé

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityInstitute for Research in Immunology and Cancer
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsGermlineBiologyOocyteCaenorhabditis elegansCell biologyCytoplasmCytokinesisGerm cellNurse cellCell divisionSomatic cellGeneticsOogenesisCellEmbryoGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In most animals, the growth of oocytes depends on the delivery of cytoplasm from other germ cells ("nurse" cells) via cytoplasmic bridges. In some cases, such as in mice and Drosophila, these bridges are formed via incomplete cytokinesis and connect the germ cells to the oocyte directly. In other animals, like the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans (C. elegans), germ cells are connected to an anucleate core of cytoplasm, termed the rachis, that supplies materials to the oocyte. This difference in germline architecture poses an interesting challenge for tissue development. Whereas in the first case, stabilization of the cytokinetic ring between dividing germ cells produces the final organization, with the total number of cytoplasmic bridges being one fewer than the total number of germ cells; in the second scenario, germ cell division must produce two daughter cells each with their own connection to the rachis, with the total number of cytoplasmic bridges being equal to the number of germ cells. The cellular and molecular mechanisms that enable germ cells to form and maintain this latter type of architecture are incompletely understood but have been under increasing scrutiny over the last years. Here we review the recent progress in understanding C. elegans germline development from a tissue architecture perspective.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 venueDevelopmental BiologySame topicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model OrganismsFrench-language works237,207