MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020359241 · doi:10.1186/1471-213x-7-17

Expression of S100B during embryonic development of the mouse cerebellum

2007· article· en· W2020359241 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sabira Hachem, Anne-Sophie Laurenson, Jean‐Philippe Hugnot, Catherine Legraverend

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Developmental Biology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsCerebellumBiologyEmbryonic stem cellNeurogenesisProgenitor cellCell biologyGranule cellGranule (geology)PopulationPAX6GliogenesisNeuroscienceProgenitorCentral nervous systemStem cellGeneGeneticsTranscription factor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In the cerebellum of newborn S100B-EGFP mice, we had previously noted the presence of a large population of S100B-expressing cells, which we assumed to be immature Bergmann glial cells. In the present study, we have drawn on this observation to establish the precise spatio-temporal pattern of S100B gene expression in the embryonic cerebellum. RESULTS: From E12.5 until E17.5, S100B was expressed in the primary radial glial scaffold involved in Purkinje progenitor exit from the ventricular zone and in the Sox9+ glial progenitors derived from it. During the same period coinciding with the primary phase of granule neuron precursor genesis, transient EGFP expression tagged the Pax6+ forerunners of granule precursors born in the cerebellar rhombic lip. CONCLUSION: This study provides the first characterization of S100B-expressing cell types of the embryonic mouse cerebellum in a high-resolution map. The transient activation of the S100B gene distinguishes granule neuron precursors from all other types of precursors so far identified in the rhombic lip, whereas its activation in radial glial precursors is a feature of Bergmann cell gliogenesis.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations44
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Developmental BiologySame topicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsFrench-language works237,207