Induction of heat shock proteins 27 and 72 in retinal ganglion cells after acute pressure‐induced ischaemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We wanted to investigate whether heat shock protein (HSP) 27 and HSP 72 are induced in retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) after acute intraocular pressure (IOP)-induced ischaemia. METHODS: Retinal ischaemia was induced by acutely increasing IOP to 100-110 mmHg for 30 or 90 min unilaterally in Sprague Dawley rats. A fluorescent tracer (fluorogold, FG) was applied to the superior colliculi to label RGCs. Twenty-four hours, 1 week or 2 weeks after of IOP elevation, rats were killed, RGCs counted, and immunohistochemical labelling of the retina was performed. HSP-positive RGCs were counted and normalized HSP RGC counts determined. RESULTS: The ratio of FG-positive labelled RGCs in the experimental to the contralateral eye as a marker of RGC survival remained unchanged after 30 min of ischaemia: 1.09 +/- 0.11 at 1 week, and 0.94 +/- 0.28 at 2 weeks. After 90 min of ischaemia RGC survival decreased to 0.19 +/- 0.14 at 1 week, and 0.20 +/- 0.14 at 2 weeks. After 30 min of ischaemia, the normalized HSP 27- and HSP 72-positive RGC count was detected at highest levels (HSP 27: 5.42 +/- 1.18; HSP 72: 12.23 +/- 1.24) at 2 weeks compared with controls,whereas after 90 min ischaemia it was detected at higher levels at 1 week (HSP 27: 52.63 +/- 3.65; HSP 72: 206.84 +/- 60.38), as well as at 2 weeks (HSP 27: 89.00 +/- 17.21; HSP 72: 191.00 +/- 50.05). CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate an enhanced induction of HSP 27 and HSP 72 after 90 min acute IOP-induced ischaemia. In contrast to 30 min ischaemia, we showed time-dependent loss of RGCs after 90 min of ischaemia after 1 week or 2 weeks.
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".