Biology subjects

Huang, C.-K.

Publications and source records attributed to Huang, C.-K..

4 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2022

Surface curvature and basal hydraulic stress induce spatial bias in cell extrusion

Epithelial cell extrusion is employed in maintaining a healthy epithelium. It remains unclear how environmental conditions specific to various epithelial tissues, such as geometry and fluid osmolarity, affect cell extrusions. We found that, over curved surfaces, epithelial monolayers exhibited higher extrusion rates in concave regions than convex ones. This difference, and overall extrusions, decreased when osmotically induced basal hydraulic stress was reduced by increasing media osmolarity or by culturing monolayers on hydrogels. Mechanistically, basal fluid accumulation antagonized cell-substrate adhesions and the subsequent FAK-Akt survival pathway, leading to apoptotic cell death. Convex surfaces induced cellular forces that acted against osmosis, thereby promoting adhesions and lowering apoptosis. This effect was reversed in concave regions, and together, resulted in a curvature induced spatial bias in cell extrusions.

cell biology↗

bioRxiv2020

Evaluating institutional open access performance: Methodology, challenges and assessment

Open Access to research outputs is becoming rapidly more important to the global research community and society. Changes are driven by funder mandates, institutional policy, grass-roots advocacy and culture change. It has been challenging to provide a robust, transparent and updateable analysis of progress towards open access that can inform these interventions, particularly at the institutional level. Here we propose a minimum reporting standard and present a large-scale analysis of open access progress across 1,207 institutions world-wide that shows substantial progress being made. The analysis detects responses that coincide with policy and funding interventions. Among the striking results are the high performance of Latin American and African universities, particularly for gold open access, whereas overall open access levels in Europe and North America are driven by repository-mediated access. We present a top-100 of global universities with the worlds leading institutions achieving around 80% open access for 2017 publications.

scientific communication and education↗

bioRxiv2020

Evaluating institutional open access performance: Sensitivity analysis

In the article “Evaluating institutional open access performance: Methodology, challenges and assessment” we develop the first comprehensive and reproducible workflow that integrates multiple bibliographic data sources for evaluating institutional open access (OA) performance. The major data sources include Web of Science, Scopus, Microsoft Academic, and Unpaywall. However, each of these databases continues to update, both actively and retrospectively. This implies the results produced by the proposed process are potentially sensitive to both the choice of data source and the versions of them used. In addition, there remain the issue relating to selection bias in sample size and margin of error. The current work shows that the levels of sensitivity relating to the above issues can be significant at the institutional level. Hence, the transparency and clear documentation of the choices made on data sources (and their versions) and cut-off boundaries are vital for reproducibility and verifiability.View Full Text

scientific communication and education↗

bioRxiv2019

Comparison of bibliographic data sources: Implications for the robustness of university rankings

Universities are increasingly evaluated, both internally and externally on the basis of their outputs. Often these are converted to simple, and frequently contested, rankings based on quantitative analysis of those outputs. These rankings can have substantial implications for student and staff recruitment, research income and perceived prestige of a university. Both internal and external analyses usually rely on a single data source to define the set of outputs assigned to a specific university. Although some differences between such databases are documented, few studies have explored them at the institutional scale and examined the implications of these differences for the metrics and rankings that are derived from them. We address this gap by performing detailed bibliographic comparisons between three key databases: Web of Science (WoS), Scopus and, the recently relaunched Microsoft Academic (MSA). We analyse the differences between outputs with DOIs identified from each source for a sample of 155 universities and supplement this with a detailed manual analysis of the differences for fifteen universities. We find significant differences between the sources at the university level. Sources differ in the publication year of specific objects, the completeness of metadata, as well as in their coverage of disciplines, outlets, and publication type. We construct two simple rankings based on citation counts and open access status of the outputs for these universities and show dramatic changes in position based on the choice of bibliographic data sources. Those universities that experience the largest changes are frequently those from non-English speaking countries and those that are outside the top positions in international university rankings. Overall MSA has greater coverage than Scopus or WoS, but has less complete affiliation metadata. We suggest that robust evaluation measures need to consider the effect of choice of data sources and recommend an approach where data from multiple sources is integrated to provide a more robust dataset.

scientific communication and education↗