MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070645102 · doi:10.1073/pnas.0400768101

AML1/Runx1 is important for the development of hindbrain cholinergic branchiovisceral motor neurons and selected cranial sensory neurons

2004· article· en· W2070645102 on OpenAlexaff
Francesca M. Theriault, Priscillia Roy, Stefano Stifani

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDevelopmental Biology and Gene Regulation
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHindbrainNeuroscienceBiologyCholinergic neuronCholinergicMotor neuronSensory systemInterneuronSpinal cordAnatomyCentral nervous systemInhibitory postsynaptic potential

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mechanisms that regulate the acquisition of distinctive neuronal traits in the developing nervous system are poorly defined. It is shown here that the mammalian runt-related gene Runx1 is expressed in selected populations of postmitotic neurons of the embryonic central and peripheral nervous systems. These include cholinergic branchial and visceral motor neurons in the hindbrain, restricted populations of somatic motor neurons of the median and lateral motor columns in the spinal cord, as well as nociceptive and mechanoreceptor neurons in trigeminal and vestibulocochlear ganglia. In mouse embryos lacking Runx1 activity, hindbrain branchiovisceral motor neuron precursors of the cholinergic lineage are correctly specified but then fail to progress to a more differentiated state and undergo increased cell death, resulting in a neuronal loss in the mantle layer. In contrast, the development of cholinergic somatic motor neurons is unaffected. Runx1 inactivation also leads to a loss of selected sensory neurons in trigeminal and vestibulocochlear ganglia. These findings uncover previously unrecognized roles for Runx1 in the regulation of mammalian neuronal subtype 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 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)0.000
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 score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations59
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicDevelopmental Biology and Gene RegulationFrench-language works237,207