MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

TrkB Receptor Signaling Regulates Developmental Death Dynamics, But Not Final Number, of Retinal Ganglion Cells

2003· article· en· W2108848045 on OpenAlexaff
Graeme S. Pollock, Régine Robichon, Kristina A. Boyd, Kristi A. Kerkel, Melissa Kramer, Johnalyn Lyles, Ranjini Ambalavanar, Asema Khan, David R. Kaplan, Robert W. Williams, Douglas O. Frost

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersNational Eye InstituteNational Institutes of HealthAmgen
KeywordsTropomyosin receptor kinase BNeurotrophinBiologyBrain-derived neurotrophic factorNeurotrophic factorsTropomyosin receptor kinase ALow-affinity nerve growth factor receptorCell biologyReceptorInternal medicineNeuroscienceEndocrinologyGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the effects of endogenous neurotrophin signaling on the death-survival of immature retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) in vivo. Null mutation of brain-derived neurotrophic factor [(BDNF) alone or in combination with neurotrophin 4 (NT4)] increases the peak rate of developmental RGC death as compared with normal. Null mutation of NT4 alone is ineffective. Null mutation of the full-length trkB (trkBFL) receptor catalytic domain produces a dose-dependent increase in the peak RGC death rate that is negatively correlated with retinal levels of trkBFL protein and phosphorylated (activated) trkBFL. Depletion of target-derived trkB ligands by injection of trkB-Fc fusion protein into the superior colliculus increases the peak rate of RGC death compared with trkA-Fc-treated and normal animals. Adult trkBFL+/- mice have a normal number of RGCs, despite an elevated peak death rate of immature RGCs. Thus, target-derived BDNF modulates the dynamics of developmental RGC death through trkBFL activation, but BDNF/trkB-independent mechanisms determine the final number of RGCs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations47
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207