Photic history modifies susceptibility to retinal damage in albino trout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Albino vertebrates exposed to intense light typically lose photoreceptors via apoptosis, and thus serve as useful models of retinal degeneration. In contrast, albino rainbow trout exposed to intense light maintain populations of rod and cone nuclei despite substantial damage to rod outer segments (ROS). The aim of this study was to differentiate between two hypotheses that could account for this divergent result: (1) trout rod nuclei remain intact during light damage, or (2) rod nuclei die but are replaced by cell proliferation. A further aim was to examine whether photic history modulates retinal damage, as in rodents. Albino and normally pigmented trout were moved from defined photic regimes into full daylight, while some were not moved to serve as protected controls. ROS were always maintained in pigmented fish and in albinos protected from full daylight. In albinos exposed to full daylight, ROS were removed over most of the central retina, whereas rod nuclei were maintained in the outer nuclear layer over 10 days. Pyknotic and TUNEL-labeled rod nuclei were abundant in affected albinos at all time-points tested. Rod death occurred without a decrease in the number of rod nuclei, confirming that proliferation must be replacing cells. Indeed a transient increase in proliferation was observed in retinal progenitors of albinos receiving 5 days of damaging light. This proliferative response was decreased with further damage. Cones remained intact even in areas where rod nuclei had degenerated. Pretreatment with light of moderate versus low intensity light affected the cell death and proliferative responses, and the ectopic localization of rod opsin. We conclude that apoptotic demise of rods, but not cones, occurred during light damage in retinas of albino trout and proliferative responses have a limited a capacity to replace lost rods.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".