<i>LacZ</i> -expressing olfactory ensheathing cells do not associate with myelinated axons after implantation into the compressed spinal cord
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies have shown that implanting olfactory ensheathing cells (OECs) may be a promising therapeutic strategy to promote functional recovery after spinal cord injury. Several fundamental questions remain, however, regarding their in vivo interactions in the damaged spinal cord. We have induced a clip compression injury at the T10 level of the spinal cord in adult rats. After a delay of 1 week, OECs isolated from embryonic day 18 rats were implanted into the cystic cavity that had formed at the site of injury. Before implantation, OECs were infected with a LacZ-expressing retrovirus. At 3 weeks after implantation, LacZ-expressing OECs survived the implantation procedure and remained localized to the cystic cavity. At the electron microscopic level, the cystic cavity had clusters of LacZ-expressing OECs and numerous Schwann cells lacking LacZ expression. Although labeled OECs made no direct contact with axons, unlabeled Schwann cells were associated with either a single myelinated axon or multiple unmyelinated axons. Positively labeled OEC processes often enveloped multiple Schwann cell-axon units. These observations suggest that the role of OECs as the primary mediators of the beneficial effects on axon growth, myelination, and functional recovery after spinal cord injury may require re-evaluation.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".