MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020122922 · doi:10.1083/jcb.200301080

Rho activation patterns after spinal cord injury and the role of activated Rho in apoptosis in the central nervous system

2003· article· en· W2020122922 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine Dubreuil, Matthew J. Winton, Lisa McKerracher

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Cell Biology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRHOABiologyCell biologyCentral nervous systemSpinal cord injuryApoptosisTUNEL assaySpinal cordSignal transductionMolecular biologyNeuroscienceBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Growth inhibitory proteins in the central nervous system (CNS) block axon growth and regeneration by signaling to Rho, an intracellular GTPase. It is not known how CNS trauma affects the expression and activation of RhoA. Here we detect GTP-bound RhoA in spinal cord homogenates and report that spinal cord injury (SCI) in both rats and mice activates RhoA over 10-fold in the absence of changes in RhoA expression. In situ Rho-GTP detection revealed that both neurons and glial cells showed Rho activation at SCI lesion sites. Application of a Rho antagonist (C3-05) reversed Rho activation and reduced the number of TUNEL-labeled cells by approximately 50% in both injured mouse and rat, showing a role for activated Rho in cell death after CNS injury. Next, we examined the role of the p75 neurotrophin receptor (p75NTR) in Rho signaling. After SCI, an up-regulation of p75NTR was detected by Western blot and observed in both neurons and glia. Treatment with C3-05 blocked the increase in p75NTR expression. Experiments with p75NTR-null mutant mice showed that immediate Rho activation after SCI is p75NTR dependent. Our results indicate that blocking overactivation of Rho after SCI protects cells from p75NTR-dependent apoptosis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations400
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Cell BiologySame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207