MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021878310 · doi:10.1002/dvdy.22769

Cloning and expression of a retinoic acid receptor β2 subtype from the adult newt: Evidence for an early role in tail and caudal spinal cord regeneration

2011· article· en· W2021878310 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher Carter, Alysen Clark, Gaynor E. Spencer, Robert L. Carlone

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Dynamics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyRetinoic acidSpinal cordRegeneration (biology)Retinoic acid receptorCentral nervous systemReceptorCell biologyRetinoidEpendymal CellAnatomyIn situ hybridizationInternal medicineEndocrinologyNeuroscienceMessenger RNAGeneticsCell cultureGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Retinoic acid receptor beta 2 (RARβ2) has been proposed as an important receptor mediating retinoid-induced axonal growth and regeneration in developing mammalian spinal cord and brain. In urodele amphibians, organisms capable of extensive central nervous system (CNS) regeneration as adults, this receptor had not been isolated, nor had its function been characterized. We have cloned a full-length RARβ2 cDNA from adult newt CNS. This receptor, NvRARβ2, is expressed in various adult organs capable of regeneration, including the spinal cord. Interestingly, both the NvRARβ2 mRNA and protein are up-regulated during the first 2 weeks after amputation of the tail, primarily in the ependymoglial and meningeal tissues near the rostral cut surface of the cord. Treatment with LE135, a RARβ-selective antagonist, caused a significant inhibition of ependymal outgrowth and a decrease in tail regenerate length. These data support an early role for this receptor in caudal spinal cord and tail regeneration in this amphibian.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations27
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental DynamicsSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207