MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7005386344

Rearing Mesostoma ehrenbergii and studying chromosome movements during meiosis in their spermatocytes

2016· other· en· W7005386344 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine Invertebrate Physiology and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork University
KeywordsKinetochoreAnaphaseBivalent (engine)MeiosisCentromereChromosome segregationMicrotubule
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"The Mesostoma ehrenbergii spermatocyte is an advantageous cell for studying meiosis. Its many unique features include regular and persistent bivalent kinetochore oscillations, distance segregation of univalents and the presence of a precocious cleavage furrow. In studying these unconventional aspects of meiosis in one cell, I concentrated on studying which components are involved in the force production driving chromosome movement, using bivalent kinetochore oscillations as a measurable conversion. Mesostoma spermatocytes had not been well studied and there are only a handful of articles in the literature that describe them so l first had to characterize their normal behaviour. I determined that kinetochore movement to the pole is faster than kinetochore movement away from the pole; bivalents enter into anaphase in the middle of an oscillation cycle as there is no definable metaphase; bivalents reorient (and kinetochores switch poles) after achieving bipolar orientation; and univalents move multiple times between spindle poles. After characterizing kinetochore oscillations in these spermatocytes, I used an ultraviolet microbeam, an optical cutting laser and an optical trapping laser as tools to study the components involved in driving kinetochore movements to and away from the pole. The results from my UV microbeam and laser microbeam experiments suggest that different mechanisms are required to produce kinetochore movement to the pole versus away from the pole, and that non-microtubule components and/or a spindle matrix are involved as kinetochores still moved to the pole in the absence of microtubule continuity between kinetochore and pole. Comparisons of normal bivalent reorientations, where partner kinetochores switch poles, with laser-induced reorientations, where partners retain their original orientations, suggest that the segregation of bivalents is non-random. UV irradiations indicated that the cleavage furrow changes positions in response to alterations in spindle components. Severed chromosome arms moved to the other arm, indicating that there is a connection ("tether") between bivalent arms. The results from my optical trapping experiments determined that the force produced by the spindle to move chromosomes to the pole is one one-hundredth of 700pN that was originally measured and is close to the theoretical values."

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.144
Teacher spread0.136 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)Same topicMarine Invertebrate Physiology and EcologyFrench-language works237,207