Heterogeneity of horizontal cells in the chicken retina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite numerous reports that different markers are expressed by horizontal cells in the avian retina, it remains unknown whether different types of horizontal cells can be defined by differences in their immunocytochemical profiles. The purpose of this study was to rectify this deficiency. We identified horizontal cells by indirect immunofluorescence with antibodies to calretinin, trkA, GABA, Prox1, AP2alpha, Pax6, islet1, and Lim1 + 2. We found two major groups of horizontal cells, those that express trkA and those that express calretinin. The trkA-immunoreactive (-IR) horizontal cells had small, round somata and robust, bulbous dendritic endings, whereas calretinin-IR horizontal cells had large, polygonal cell bodies and fine, diffuse dendritic endings, both contacting the calbindin-IR pedicles of double cones. Weak gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) immunoreactivity was observed only in a few of the trkA-IR horizontal cells, whereas the overlap of calretinin and GABA immunoreactivities was 100%. The majority of trkA-IR horizontal cells expressed islet1, and the majority of calretinin-IR horizontal cells expressed Lim1 + 2, AP2alpha, and Pax6. Islet1 immunoreactivity was observed in a small fraction of calretinin-IR/non-trkA-IR cells. In agreement with previous reports, we detected Prox1 immunoreactivity in all types of horizontal cells. These immunolabeling profiles suggest that there are four immunochemically distinct subtypes of horizontal cells in the postnatal chick retina, which may match the four types that have been observed in Golgi-impregnated pigeon and turtle retinas.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".