Phospholipid Growth Factors and Corneal Wound Healing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In many tissue types, wound healing involves cell division and migration over and into the wound area to cover and remodel the wound. LPA and other members of the phospholipid lipid growth factor (PLGF) family stimulate many of the activities involved in wound healing. In the rabbit cornea, we have found that keratocytes from wounded corneas have a volume-activated Cl- current activated by LPA and alkenyl-LPA. This current is minimally activated by cyclic PA and SPC, and is not activated by LPA in cells from uninjured corneas. Biochemical examination of PLGFs in aqueous humor and lacrimal fluid before and after wounding identified LPA, alkenyl-GP, PA, and lyso PS, with elevated PLGF activity after wounding. In recent experiments examining human corneal cell lines and cultured cells using RT-PCR, we found mRNA for EDG receptors 1-5, with an apparent increase in EDG-3, -4, and -5 following brief SDS application to cell lines, and EDG receptors 2-5 induction in late-passage human corneal epithelial cells. This work points to a significant role for PLGFs in the corneal wound-healing process.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".