Secondary Damage in the Spinal Cord after Motor Cortex Injury in Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When neurons within the motor cortex are fatally injured, their axons, many of which project into the spinal cord, undergo wallerian degeneration. Pathological processes occurring downstream of the cortical damage have not been extensively studied. We created a focal forelimb motor cortex injury in rats and found that axons from cell bodies located in the hindlimb motor cortex (spared by the cortical injury) become secondarily damaged in the spinal cord. To assess axonal degeneration in the spinal cord, we quantified silver staining in the corticospinal tract (CST) at 1 week and 4 weeks after the injury. We found a significant increase in silver deposition at the thoracic spinal cord level at 4 weeks compared to 1 week post-injury. At both time points, no degenerating neurons could be found in the hindlimb motor cortex. In a separate experiment, we showed that direct injury of neurons within the hindlimb motor cortex caused marked silver deposition in the thoracic CST at 1 week post-injury, and declined thereafter. Therefore, delayed axonal degeneration in the thoracic spinal cord after a focal forelimb motor cortex injury is indicative of secondary damage at the spinal cord level. Furthermore, immunolabeling of spinal cord sections showed that a local inflammatory response dominated by partially activated Iba-1-positive microglia is mounted in the CST, a viable mechanism to cause the observed secondary degeneration of fibers. In conclusion, we demonstrate that following motor cortex injury, wallerian degeneration of axons in the spinal cord leads to secondary damage, which is likely mediated by inflammatory processes.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".