Dysmorphic Photoreceptors in a P23H Mutant Rhodopsin Model of Retinitis Pigmentosa Are Metabolically Active and Capable of Regenerating to Reverse Retinal Degeneration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluated the capacity of Xenopus laevis retina to regenerate photoreceptor cells after cyclic light-mediated acute rod photoreceptor degeneration in a transgenic P23H mutant rhodopsin model of retinits pigmentosa. After discontinuation of cyclic light exposure, we monitored histologic progression of retinal regeneration over a 3 week recovery period. To assess their metabolomic states, contralateral eyes were processed for computational molecular phenotyping. We found that retinal degeneration in the P23H rhodopsin mutation could be partially reversed, with regeneration of rod photoreceptors recovering normal morphology (including full-length rod outer segments) by the end of the 3 week recovery period. In contrast, retinal degeneration mediated by directly induced apoptosis did not recover in the 3 week recovery period. Dystrophic rod photoreceptors with truncated rod outer segments were identified as the likely source of rod photoreceptor regeneration in the P23H retinas. These dystrophic photoreceptors remain metabolically active despite having lost most of their outer segments.
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".