Molecular Characterization of the Mouse Superior Lateral Parabrachial Nucleus through Expression of the Transcription Factor Runx1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The ability to precisely identify separate neuronal populations is essential to the understanding of the development and function of different brain structures. This necessity is particularly evident in regions such as the brainstem, where the anatomy is quite complex and little is known about the identity, origin, and function of a number of distinct nuclei due to the lack of specific cellular markers. In this regard, the gene encoding the transcription factor Runx1 has emerged as a specific marker of restricted neuronal populations in the murine central and peripheral nervous systems. The aim of this study was to precisely characterize the expression of Runx1 in the developing and postnatal mouse brainstem. METHODS AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Anatomical and immunohistochemical studies were used to characterize mouse Runx1 expression in the brainstem. It is shown here that Runx1 is expressed in a restricted population of neurons located in the dorsolateral rostral hindbrain. These neurons define a structure that is ventromedial to the dorsal nucleus of the lateral lemniscus, dorsocaudal to the medial paralemniscal nucleus and rostral to the cerebellum. Runx1 expression in these cells is first observed at approximately gestational day 12.5, persists into the adult brain, and is lost in knockout mice lacking the transcription factor Atoh1, an important regulator of the development of neuronal lineages of the rhombic lip. Runx1-expressing neurons in the rostral hindbrain produce cholecystokinin and also co-express members of the Groucho/Transducin-like Enhancer of split protein family. CONCLUSION: Based on the anatomical and molecular characteristics of the Runx1-expressing cells in the rostral hindbrain, we propose that Runx1 expression in this region of the mouse brain defines the superior lateral parabrachial nucleus.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".