MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034476672 · doi:10.1002/dev.10024

Functional recovery and dendritic hypertrophy after posterior and complete cingulate lesions on postnatal day 10

2002· article· en· W2034476672 on OpenAlexaff
Claudia L. R. Gonzalez, Robbin Gibb, Bryan Kolb

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Psychobiology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMuscle hypertrophyPosterior cingulatePsychologyMedicineNeuroscienceCardiologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rats received lesions of the posterior cingulate cortex or both the anterior and posterior cingulate cortex (total cingulate), or sham procedures, on postnatal Day 10. As adults, animals were trained in the Morris water task. Both the cingulate lesion groups showed substantial functional recovery relative to our previous studies of adult operates or animals with perinatal cingulate lesions. A Golgi analyis of layer III pyramidal cells in parietal cortex showed an increase in dendritic length in the lesion animals relative to sham controls, which is similar to previous findings for rats with anterior cingulate but not motor or parietal lesions. In addition, there was a partial regeneration of the anterior tissue in the total cingulates, which in some cases extended into the posterior region. This is consistent with earlier findings that anterior cingulate lesions around Day 10 stimulate neurogenesis. It appears that there is something special about the reparative processes and subsequent functional recovery that follow midline neocortical lesions.

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 score0.008

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations13
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental PsychobiologySame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207