Distinct biochemical signatures characterize peripherin isoform expression in both traumatic neuronal injury and motor neuron disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peripherin is a type III intermediate filament protein that is up-regulated during neuronal injury and is a major component of pathological inclusions found within degenerating motor neurons of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). The relationship between these inclusions and their protein constituents remains largely unknown. We have previously shown that peripherin expression is characterized by tissue-specific, intra-isoform associations that contribute to filament structure; changes to the normal isoform expression pattern is associated with malformed filaments and intracellular inclusions. Here, we profile peripherin isoform expression and ratio changes in traumatic neuronal injury, transgenic mouse models of motor neuron disease, and ALS. Extensive western blot analyses of Triton X-100 soluble and insoluble fractions of neuronal tissue from these conditions revealed significant changes in peripherin isoform content which could be differentiated by electrophoretic banding patterns to produce distinct peripherin biochemical signatures. Significantly, we found that the pattern of peripherin expression in ALS most closely approximates that of peripherin over-expressing mice, but differs with regard to inter-individual variations in isoform-specific expression. Overall, these results provide important insights into complex post-transcriptional processes that may underlie a continuum between peripherin-mediated neuronal repair and its role in the pathogenesis of motor neuron disease.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Bench or experimental | high |
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".