MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1960952404 · doi:10.1002/hipo.22504

Bcl‐2 is required for the survival of doublecortin‐expressing immature neurons

2015· article· en· W1960952404 on OpenAlexaff
Maheen Ceizar, Jagroop Dhaliwal, Yanwei Xi, Megan Smallwood, Keren Leviel Kumar, Diane C. Lagace

Bibliographic record

VenueHippocampus · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDoublecortinNeural stem cellNeurogenesisBiologyProgenitor cellCell biologyStem cellNestinNeuroscienceHippocampusDentate gyrus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the adult brain only a small proportion of the neural stem and progenitor cells (NPCs) and their progeny survive to become mature neurons in the hippocampus. Recent studies have elucidated the roles for members of the B-cell lymphoma-2 (Bcl-2) family of proteins in regulating the survival of NPCs and their progeny at different stages of maturation, yet the requirement of Bcl-2 during this process remains unknown. Here we report that inducible removal of Bcl-2 from nestin-expressing neural stem/progenitor cells and their progeny resulted in a reduction in the survival of doublecortin-expressing cells in the absence of changing the number of radial-glial stem cells or dividing NPCs. The requirement of Bcl-2 for the survival of maturing NPCs was confirmed by removal of Bcl-2 through infecting NPCs using a retroviral strategy that resulted in the complete loss of Bcl-2 null cells by 30-day post-viral injection. Furthermore, we observed that the function of Bcl-2 in the adult-generated neurons was dependent on the Bcl-2-associated X (BAX) protein, since Bcl-2 null NPCs were rescued in BAX knockout mice. These results indicate that Bcl-2 is an essential regulator in the survival of doublecortin-expressing immature neurons through a mechanism that is upstream of BAX.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.604

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHippocampusSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207