MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000867734 · doi:10.1002/cne.1176

Constitutive expression of heat shock protein HSP25 in the central nervous system of the developing and adult mouse

2001· article· en· W2000867734 on OpenAlexaff
Carol L. Armstrong, Anne Marie Krueger‐Naug, R. William Currie, Richard Hawkes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Comparative Neurology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHeat shock proteins research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Calgary
FundersJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsBiologyInferior colliculusCerebellumSpinal cordNeuroscienceCentral nervous systemIn situ hybridizationSuperior colliculusHeat shock proteinThalamusMauthner cellNucleusAnatomyGene expressionFish <Actinopterygii>GeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization have been used to survey constitutive heat shock protein (HSP)25 expression in the brain and spinal cord of the developing and adult mouse. The data reveal both transient and sustained patterns of expression and demonstrate robust differences between mice and rats. During development, HSP25 is transiently expressed in neurons of the inferior colliculus, various thalamic subnuclei, and the majority of Purkinje cells in the cerebellum. Sustained expression into adulthood is seen in neurons of the cranial nerve nuclei, spinal cord motoneurons, median preoptic nucleus, and a subset of Purkinje cells. Differences in HSP25 expression between adult rats and mice include the somatic motor nuclei innervating the extraocular muscles, which are HSP25 immunoreactive only in the rat. Similar differences in HSP25 expression are seen during the development of the inferior colliculus, thalamus, and cerebellum, where expression is restricted to mice.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations53
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Comparative NeurologySame topicHeat shock proteins researchFrench-language works237,207