MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086766926 · doi:10.1083/jcb.200906089

Pincher-generated Nogo-A endosomes mediate growth cone collapse and retrograde signaling

2010· article· en· W2086766926 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Armela Joset, Dana A. Dodd, Simon Halegoua, Martin E. Schwab

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Cell Biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeUniversität ZürichEuropean CommissionYork UniversityChristopher and Dana Reeve FoundationSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGrowth coneRHOABiologyCell biologyNeuriteEndosomeMyelinDynaminEndocytosisSignal transductionCellNeuroscienceAxonCentral nervous systemIntracellularBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nogo-A is one of the most potent myelin-associated inhibitors for axonal growth, regeneration, and plasticity in the adult central nervous system. The Nogo-A-specific fragment NogoDelta20 induces growth cone collapse, and inhibits neurite outgrowth and cell spreading by activating RhoA. Here, we show that NogoDelta20 is internalized into neuronal cells by a Pincher- and rac-dependent, but clathrin- and dynamin-independent, mechanism. Pincher-mediated macroendocytosis results in the formation of NogoDelta20-containing signalosomes that direct RhoA activation and growth cone collapse. In compartmentalized chamber cultures, NogoDelta20 is endocytosed into neurites and retrogradely transported to the cell bodies of dorsal root ganglion neurons, triggering RhoA activation en route and decreasing phosphorylated cAMP response element binding levels in cell bodies. Thus, Pincher-dependent macroendocytosis leads to the formation of Nogo-A signaling endosomes, which act both within growth cones and after retrograde transport in the cell body to negatively regulate the neuronal growth program.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations92
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Cell BiologySame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207