Method for Counting Motor Units in Mice and Validation Using a Mathematical Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Weakness and atrophy are clinical signs that accompany muscle denervation resulting from motor neuron disease, peripheral neuropathies, and injury. Advances in our understanding of the genetics and molecular biology of these disorders have led to the development of therapeutic alternatives designed to slow denervation and promote reinnervation. Preclinical in vitro research gave rise to the need of a method for measuring the effects in animal models. Our goal was to develop an efficient method to determine the number of motor neurons making functional connections to muscle in a transgenic mouse model of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). We developed a novel protocol for motor unit number estimation (MUNE) using incremental stimulation. The method involves analysis of twitch waveforms using a new software program, ITS-MUNE, designed for interactive calculation of motor unit number. The method was validated by testing simulated twitch data from a mathematical model of the neuromuscular system. Computer simulations followed the same stimulus-response protocol and produced waveform data that were indistinguishable from experiments. We show that our MUNE protocol is valid, with high precision and small bias across a wide range of motor unit numbers. The method is especially useful for large muscle groups where MUNE could not be done using manual methods. The results are reproducible across naïve and expert analysts, making it suitable for easy implementation. The ITS-MUNE analysis method has the potential to quantitatively measure the progression of motor neuron diseases and therefore the efficacy of treatments designed to alleviate pathologic processes of muscle denervation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
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".