MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

An Intact Intermediate Filament Network Is Required for Collateral Sprouting of Small Diameter Nerve Fibers

2003· article· en· W1947190710 on OpenAlexaff
Teri L. Belecky‐Adams, Michael V. Holmes, Yuqing Shan, C. Susan Tedesco, Carla Mascari, Ajay Kaul, David C. Wight, Randal E. Morris, Mark A. Sussman, Jack Diamond, Linda M. Parysek

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersU.S. Public Health Service
KeywordsPeripherinSproutingNeuroscienceDorsal root ganglionCell biologyBiologyTransgeneRegeneration (biology)Sensory systemAnatomyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Expression of the intermediate filament (IF) protein peripherin is initiated during development at the time of axonal extension and increases during regeneration of nerve fibers. To test whether the IF network is essential for neuron process outgrowth in the mature organism in vivo, we disrupted endogenous peripherin IF in small-sized dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neurons in transgenic mice via expression of a mutant peripherin transgene under control of peripherin gene regulatory sequences. Anatomical and functional analyses showed that these neurons send peripheral and central axonal projections to correct targets, express correct neuropeptides, and mediate acute pain responses normally. However, disruption of IF significantly impaired the ability of uninjured small-sized DRG neurons to sprout collateral axons into adjacent denervated skin, indicating a critical role for intact IF in plasticity, specifically in compensatory nociceptive nerve sprouting.

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 score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations23
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuroscience→Same topicNerve injury and regeneration→French-language works237,207→