MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059324013 · doi:10.1196/annals.1317.024

PACAP and Ceramides Exert Opposite Effects on Migration, Neurite Outgrowth, and Cytoskeleton Remodeling

2006· article· en· W2059324013 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony Falluel‐Morel, David Vaudry, Nicolas Aubert, Ludovic Galas, Magalie Bénard, Magali Basille, Marc Fontaine, Alain Fournier, Hubert Vaudry, Bruno J. Gonzalez

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuropeptides and Animal Physiology
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCell biologyNeuriteCerebellumGranule cellChemistryCeramideGranule (geology)Hippocampal formationBiologyNeuroscienceBiochemistryIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During brain development, cells that fail to reach their final destination or to establish proper connections are eliminated. It has been shown that the proinflammatory cytokine second messenger ceramides and the neuropeptide pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP) play pivotal roles in the histogenesis of the cerebellum. However, little is known regarding the effects of these two factors on cerebellar granule cell migration. We have found that PACAP prevents the effects of C2-ceramide on granule cell motility and neurite outgrowth. These actions are attributable to opposite effects on actin distribution, tubulin polymerization, and Tau phosphorylation. These data suggest that PACAP and factors inducing ceramide production may control granule cell migration during cerebellar development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicNeuropeptides and Animal PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207