Antigenic compartmentation of the primate and tree shrew cerebellum: a common topography of zebrin II in <i>Macaca mulatta</i> and <i>Tupaia belangeri</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the apparent uniformity in cellular composition of the adult cerebellar cortex, functional, anatomical, mutational and molecular maps all reveal a complex topography underlying the relatively simple architecture. In particular, zebrin II, a polypeptide antigen identified as aldolase C, is restricted to a subset of Purkinje cells that form a symmetrical and reproducible array of zones and stripes. The vermis of the well-studied rodent cerebellar cortex is divided into four transverse zones--anterior ( approximately lobules I-V), central ( approximately lobules VI and VII), posterior ( approximately lobule VIII) and nodular ( approximately lobules IX and X). Each transverse zone is further subdivided mediolaterally into parasagittal stripes. To gain insight into the evolution of cerebellar compartmentation, the pattern of zebrin II expression has been compared between the primate Macaca mulatta and the tree shrew Tupaia belangeri, and the results related to previous findings from other species. Although the somata of most Purkinje cells in the Macaca cerebellum express zebrin II, parasagittal stripes can still be delineated owing to the alternating high and low zebrin II immunoreactivity in the dendrites. In the macaque vermis, a complex set of zebrin II parasagittal compartments is found in all transverse zones. Unlike in rodents, in which uniform expression domains interrupt heterogeneous zones, zebrin II parasagittal stripes in the macaque cerebellum are seen throughout the vermis. In Tupaia, the parasagittal pattern of zebrin II expression also reveals a striking array of stripes in all lobules. The data suggest that cerebellar compartmentation in Tupaia belangeri more closely resembles that of primates than it does rodents or lagomorphs.
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".