PDGFR Expression Distinguishes GFAP-Expressing Neural Stem Cells from PDGF-Responsive Neural Precursors in the Adult Periventricular Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jackson et al. (2006) have reported that adult glial fibrillary acid protein (GFAP)-expressing neural stem cells (NSCs) also express platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) receptor-α (PDGFRα), and that their stimulation by PDGF induced the formation of a glioma-like mass. Here, we reexamined the relationship between PDGFRα and GFAP expression within the three-dimensional organization of the adult periventricular area. Using four independent PDGFRα antibodies, we found that adult mouse GFAP-expressing NSCs and PDGFRα-expressing cells represent two distinct populations of neural precursors. Examination of the adult periventricular area in a mouse line that expresses nuclear-localized enhanced green fluorescent protein under the control of the PDGFRα promoter confirmed that GFAP-expressing NSCs do not express PDGFRα. Furthermore, PDGF-responsive neural precursors were found at least one cell layer subjacent to the ependymal layer, and were evenly distributed across the lateral ventricular wall, which contrasts with the reported patchy and often ependymal localization of adult GFAP-expressing NSCs. Adult human PDGFRα-expressing neural precursors were also found not to express GFAP. PDGF-responsive neural precursors, but not GFAP-expressing NSCs, responded to infusions of PDGF by generating glioma-like masses. Our results do not support the view that GFAP-expressing NSCs are the origin of glioma-like masses that form after intraventricular PDGF infusion.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".