EGF‐responsive neural stem cells are a transient population in the developing mouse spinal cord
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The adult mouse forebrain, which exhibits substantial ongoing cell genesis, contains self-renewing multipotent neural stem cells that respond to epidermal growth factor (EGF), but the adult spinal cord, which exhibits limited cell genesis, does not. Spinal cord development is a process characterized by defined periods of cell histogenesis. Thus, in the present study we asked whether EGF-responsive neural stem cells are present within the spinal cord during development. At embryonic day (E) 11, subsequent to the onset of neurogenesis, only fibroblast growth factor (FGF) receptors and FGF-2 (requiring heparan sulphate)-responsive stem cells are present in the spinal cord. Between E12 and 14, at the peak of spinal cord neurogenesis and the onset of gliogenesis, EGF receptors appear along with clonally derived highly expandable EGF-responsive neural stem cells. Following the cessation of cell histogenesis, the adult spinal cord is largely devoid of both EGF receptors and EGF-responsive stem cells. On the other hand, the FGF receptor1c subtype and multipotent FGF-2-responsive neural stem cells are present in early development and in the adult. The order of appearance of spinal cord neural stem cells and in vitro lineage analysis suggests that a more primitive FGF-2-responsive stem cell produces the EGF-responsive stem cell. These findings suggest that EGF-responsive neural stem cells appear transiently in the spinal cord, during the peak period of cell histogenesis, but are no longer present in the relatively quiescent adult structure.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".