Adult neurogenesis and cellular brain repair with neural progenitors, precursors and stem cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent work in neuroscience has shown that the adult central nervous system (CNS) contains neural progenitors, precursors and stem cells that are capable of generating new neurons, astrocytes and oligodendrocytes. While challenging the previous dogma that no new neurons are born in the adult mammalian CNS, these findings bring with them the future possibilities for development of novel neural repair strategies. The purpose of this review is to present the current knowledge about constitutively occurring adult mammalian neurogenesis, highlight the critical differences between 'neurogenic' and 'non-neurogenic' regions in the adult brain, and describe the cardinal features of two well-described neurogenic regions-the subventricular zone/olfactory bulb system and the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus. We also provide an overview of presently used models for studying neural precursors in vitro, mention some precursor transplantation models and emphasize that, in this rapidly growing field of neuroscience, one must be cautious with respect to a variety of methodological considerations for studying neural precursor cells both in vitro and in vivo. The possibility of repairing neural circuitry by manipulating neurogenesis is an intriguing one, and, therefore, we also review recent efforts to understand the conditions under which neurogenesis can be induced in non-neurogenic regions of the adult CNS. This work aims towards molecular and cellular manipulation of endogenous neural precursors in situ, without transplantation. We conclude this review with a discussion of what might be the function of newly generated neurons in the adult brain, and provide a summary of present thinking about the consequences of disturbed adult neurogenesis and the reaction of neurogenic regions to disease.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".