Unilateral dorsal column and rubrospinal tract injuries affect overground locomotion in the unrestrained rat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the importance of the rubrospinal pathway and the ascending components of the dorsal column for overground locomotion in adult, unrestrained rats. The dorsal column (excluding the corticospinal tract), the rubrospinal tract or both were damaged unilaterally in rats at the level of the upper cervical spinal cord. Behavioural analysis consisted of skilled locomotion (an evaluation of footslips during ladder walking), a paw usage task and the assessment of ground reaction forces during unrestrained locomotion. All lesioned animals used the forepaw ipsilateral to the lesions less while rearing. Animals with dorsal column injuries used the forelimb contralateral to the spinal injury significantly more while rearing compared with uninjured animals. All lesioned animals produced more footfalls while crossing the ladder compared with uninjured animals. All injuries, regardless of the pathway affected, resulted in significant alterations in body weight support and reduced braking forces from the forelimb ipsilateral to the injury during overground locomotion. Animals typically bore less weight on the hindlimb ipsilateral to the lesion compared with the hindlimb contralateral to the spinal injury. Taken together with previously published work, our data indicate that the rubrospinal and dorsal column pathways are important for forelimb support while rearing and for skilled locomotion. Additionally, the ascending dorsal column pathways and the rubrospinal tract play a role during flat surface overground locomotion and combined damage to these pathways does not alter the acquired gait.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".