Deafferentation and neurotrophin‐mediated intraspinal sprouting: a central role for the p75 neurotrophin receptor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Axonal plasticity in the adult spinal cord is governed by intrinsic neuronal growth potential and by extracellular cues. The p75 receptor (p75(NTR)) binds growth-promoting neurotrophins (NTs) as well as the common receptor for growth-inhibiting myelin-derived proteins (the Nogo receptor) and so is well situated to gauge the balance of positive and negative influences on axonal plasticity. Using transgenic mice lacking the extracellular NT-binding domain of p75(NTR) (p75-/- mice), we have examined the influence of p75(NTR) on changes in the density of primary afferent (calcitonin gene-related peptide-expressing) and descending monoaminergic (serotonin- and tyrosine hydroxylase-expressing) projections to the dorsal horn after dorsal rhizotomy, with and without concomitant application of exogenous nerve growth factor and NT-3. We found that, in intact p75-/- mice, the axon density of all populations was equal to or less than that in wild-type mice but that rhizotomy-induced intraspinal sprouting was significantly augmented. Monoaminergic axon sprouting was enhanced in both nerve growth factor- and NT-3-treated p75-/- mice compared with similarly treated wild-type mice. Primary afferent sprouting was particularly robust in NT-3-treated p75-/- mice. These in vivo results illustrate the interactions of p75(NTR) with NTs, with their respective tropomyosin-related kinase receptors and with inhibitory myelin-derived molecules. Our findings illustrate the pivotal role of p75(NTR) in spinal axonal plasticity and identify it as a potential therapeutic target for spinal cord injury.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".