Identification of Cells Expressing Cx43, Cx30, Cx26, Cx32 and Cx36 in Gap Junctions of Rat Brain and Spinal Cord
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have identified cells expressing Cx26, Cx30, Cx32, Cx36 and Cx43 in gap junctions of rat central nervous system (CNS) using confocal light microscopic immunocytochemistry and freeze-fracture replica immunogold labeling (FRIL). Confocal microscopy was used to assess general distributions of connexins, whereas the 100-fold higher resolution of FRIL allowed co-localization of several different connexins within individual ultrastructurally-defined gap junction plaques in ultrastructurally and immunologically identified cell types. In >4000 labeled gap junctions found in >370 FRIL replicas of gray matter in adult rats, Cx26, Cx30 and Cx43 were found only in astrocyte gap junctions; Cx32 was only in oligodendrocytes, and Cx36 was only in neurons. Moreover, Cx26, Cx30 and Cx43 were co-localized in most astrocyte gap junctions. Oligodendrocytes shared intercellular gap junctions only with astrocytes, and these heterologous junctions had Cx32 on the oligodendrocyte side and Cx26, Cx30 and Cx43 on the astrocyte side. In 4 and 18 day postnatal rat spinal cord, neuronal gap junctions contained Cx36, whereas Cx26 was present in leptomenigeal gap junctions. Thus, in adult rat CNS, neurons and glia express different connexins, with "permissive" connexin pairing combinations apparently defining separate pathways for neuronal vs. glial gap junctional communication.
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 | 0.000 | 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".