Ephrin-B3 Decreases the Survival of Adult Rat Spinal Cord-Derived Neural Stem/Progenitor Cells In Vitro and After Transplantation into the Injured Rat Spinal Cord
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although transplantation of neural stem/progenitor cells (NSPC) encourages regeneration and repair after spinal cord injury (SCI), the survival of transplanted NSPC is limited. Ephrin-B3 has been shown to reduce the death of endogenous NSPC in the subventricular zone of the mouse brain without inducing uncontrolled proliferation. Due to similarities in the environment of the brain and spinal cord, we hypothesized that ephrin-B3 might reduce the death of both transplanted and endogenous spinal cord-derived NSPC. Both normal and injured (26 g clip compression) spinal cords were examined. Ephrin-B3-Fc was tested, and Fc fragments and phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) were used as controls. We found that EphA4 receptors were expressed by spinal cord-derived NSPC and expressed in the normal and injured rat spinal cord (higher expression in the latter). In vitro, ephrin-B3-Fc did not significantly reduce the survival of NSPC except at 1 μg/mL (P<0.05), but Fc fragments alone reduced NSPC survival at all doses in a dose-dependent fashion. In vivo, intrathecal infusion of ephrin-B3-Fc increased the proliferation of endogenous ependymal cells and the proportion of proliferating cells that expressed the glial fibrillary acidic protein astrocytic marker in the injured spinal cord compared with the infusion of PBS (P<0.05). However, in the injured spinal cord, the infusion of either ephrin-B3-Fc or Fc fragments alone caused a 20-fold reduction in the survival of transplanted NSPC (P<0.001). Thus, after SCI, ephrin-B3-Fc and Fc fragments are toxic to transplanted NSPC.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".