MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054603079 · doi:10.1155/2010/130429

The Coexpression of Reelin and Neuronal Nitric Oxide Synthase in a Subpopulation of Dentate Gyrus Neurons Is Downregulated in Heterozygous Reeler Mice

2010· article· en· W2054603079 on OpenAlexafffund
Raquel Romay-Tallón, Iria G. Dopeso‐Reyes, April L. Lussier, Lisa E. Kalynchuk, Héctor J. Caruncho

Bibliographic record

VenueNeural Plasticity · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinisterio de Ciencia y Tecnología
KeywordsReelinDAB1ReelerDentate gyrusSubgranular zoneNeuroscienceColocalizationHippocampusHippocampal formationBiologyNitric oxide synthaseCell biologyEndocrinologyNitric oxideExtracellular matrix

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reelin is an extracellular matrix protein expressed in several interneuron subtypes in the hippocampus and dentate gyrus. Neuronal nitric oxide synthase (nNOS) is also expressed by interneurons in these areas. We investigated whether reelin and nNOS are co-localized in the same population of hippocampal interneurons, and whether this colocalization is altered in the heterozygous reeler mouse. We found colocalization of nNOS in reelin-positive cells in the CA1 stratum radiatum and lacunosum moleculare, the CA3 stratum radiatum, and the dentate gyrus subgranular zone, molecular layer, and hilus. In heterozygous reeler mice, the colocalization of nNOS in reelin-positive cells was significantly decreased only in the subgranular zone and molecular layer. The coexpression of reelin and nNOS in several hippocampal regions suggests that reelin and nNOS may work synergistically to promote glutamatergic function, and the loss of this coexpression in heterozygous reeler mice may underlie some of the behavioral deficits observed in these animals.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.838

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeural PlasticitySame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207