MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108393999 · doi:10.1096/fj.06-6155com

RNAi pathway is functional in peripheral nerve axons

2007· article· en· W2108393999 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alexander K. Murashov, Vishnu Chintalgattu, Р. Р. Исламов, Teresa E. Lever, Elena S. Pak, Paulina Sierpinski, Laxmansa C. Katwa, Michael R. Van Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRotman Research Institute, Baycrest
KeywordsRNA interferenceTranslation (biology)BiologyGene silencingCell biologyRNA-induced silencing complexGene knockdownSciatic nerveNeuroscienceNucleaseRNAMessenger RNAAnatomyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent observations demonstrated that translation of mRNAs may occur in axonal processes at sites that are long distances away from the neuronal perikaria. While axonal protein synthesis has been documented in several studies, the mechanism of its regulation remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate whether RNA interference (RNAi) may be one of the pathways that control local protein synthesis in axons. Here we show that sciatic nerve contains Argonaute2 nuclease, fragile X mental retardation protein, p100 nuclease, and Gemin3 helicase-components of the RNA-induced silencing complex (RISC). Application of short-interfering RNAs against neuronal beta-tubulin to the sciatic nerve initiated RISC formation, causing a decrease in levels of neuronal beta-tubulin III mRNA and corresponding protein, as well as a significant reduction in retrograde labeling of lumbar motor neurons. Our observations indicate that RNAi is functional in peripheral mammalian axons and is independent from the neuronal cell body or Schwann cells. We introduce a concept of local regulation of axonal translation via RNAi.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations91
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207