Neuronal gene expression and function in the growth-stimulated R28 retinal precursor cell line
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Proliferative retinal progenitor cells that express neuronal characteristics are potentially useful for developmental studies and as experimental graft material. The continuously-growing R28 retinal cell line has been distributed to over 60 laboratories for a variety of studies, yet has not been fully characterized. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that the proliferative R28 retinal cell line contains subpopulations of cells that express neuronal mRNAs and proteins characteristic of CNS neurons. METHODS: To this end, we sought to determine the potential retinal, neuronal, and growth-related characteristics of this retinal cell line through gene expression profiling, coupled with confirmatory immunocytochemistry and electrophysiology. RESULTS: Despite expression of growth-stimulatory oncogenes and growth-promoting factors, subpopulations of R28 cells express abundant retinal and neuronal markers, as well as the functional capacity to respond to specific neurotransmitters such as dopamine, acetylcholine, serotonin, and glycine. CONCLUSION: Proliferative R28 cells retain functional neuronal properties that may prove useful in future studies of neuronal differentiation and development.
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 | 0.001 |
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.
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".