Molecular mechanisms of glutamate neurotoxicity in mixed cultures of NT2‐derived neurons and astrocytes: Protective effects of coenzyme Q<sub>10</sub>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although glutamate excitotoxicity has long been implicated in neuronal cell death associated with a variety of neurological disorders, the molecular mechanisms underlying this process are not yet fully understood. In part, this is due to the lack of relevant experimental cell systems recapitulating the in vivo neuronal environment, mainly neuronal-glial interactions. To explore these mechanisms, we have analyzed the cytotoxic effects of glutamate on mixed cultures of NT2/N neurons and NT2/A astrocytes derived from human NT2/D1 cells. In these cultures, the neurons were resistant to glutamate alone (up to 2 mM for 24-48 hr), but they responded to a simultaneous exposure to 0.5 mM glutamate and 6 hr of hypoxia. Neuronal cell death occurred during subsequent periods of reoxygenation (>30% within 24 hr). This was associated with a marked decrease of intracellular ATP, a significant increase in reactive oxygen species (ROS) and downregulation of glutamate uptake by astrocytes. Thus, under energy failure and high levels of ROS production, only the neurons from these mixed cultures succumbed to glutamate neurotoxicity; the astrocytic cells remained unaffected by the treatment. Taken together, our data suggested that glutamate excitotoxicity might be due to the energy failure and oxidative stress affecting the properties of the NMDA glutamate receptors and causing impairment of glutamate transporters. Cells pretreated for 72 hr with 10 microg/ml of coenzyme Q(10) (functions both as a ROS scavenger and co-factor of mitochondrial electron transport), were protected, suggesting a useful role for coenzyme Q(10) in treatments of neurological diseases associated with glutamate excitotoxicity. A model of the complex interactions between neurons and astrocytes in regulating glutamate metabolism is presented.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".