MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1548461771 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0132796

Expression and Misexpression of the miR-183 Family in the Developing Hearing Organ of the Chicken

2015· article· en· W1548461771 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kaidi D. Zhang, Michelle L. Stoller, Donna M. Fekete

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of GeneticsNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication DisordersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBiologyOtic vesicleSpiral ganglionInner earHair cellCell biologyCochleamicroRNAAnatomyGene expressionGeneticsIn situ hybridizationGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The miR-183 family consists of 3 related microRNAs (miR-183, miR-96, miR-182) that are required to complete maturation of primary sensory cells in the mammalian inner ear. Because the level of these microRNAs is not uniform across hair cell subtypes in the murine cochlea, the question arises as to whether hair cell phenotypes are influenced by microRNA expression levels. To address this, we used the chicken embryo to study expression and misexpression of this gene family. By in situ hybridization, expression of all 3 microRNAs is robust in immature hair cells of both auditory and vestibular organs and is present in the statoacoustic ganglion. The auditory organ, called the basilar papilla, shows a weak radial gradient (highest on the neural side) in prosensory cells near the base on embryonic day 7. About nine days later, the basilar papilla also displays a longitudinal gradient (highest in apical hair cells) for the 3 microRNAs. Tol2-mediated gene delivery was used to ask whether cell phenotypes are malleable when the prosensory epithelium was forced to overexpress the miR-183 family. The expression plasmid included EGFP as a reporter located upstream of an intron carrying the microRNA genes. The vectors were electroporated into the otic cup/vesicle, resulting in strong co-expression of EGFP and the miR-183 family that persisted for at least 2 weeks. This manipulation did not generate ectopic hair cells in non-sensory territories of the cochlear duct, although within the basilar papilla, hair cells were over-represented relative to supporting cells. There was no evidence for a change in hair cell phenotypes, such as short-to-tall, or basal-to-apical hair cell features. Therefore, while increasing expression of the miR-183 family was sufficient to influence cell lineage decisions, it did not redirect the differentiation of hair cells towards alternative radial or longitudinal phenotypes.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.092 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsFrench-language works237,207