Adult Rodent Neurogenic Regions: The Ventricular Subependyma Contains Neural Stem Cells, But the Dentate Gyrus Contains Restricted Progenitors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neurogenesis persists in two adult brain regions: the ventricular subependyma and the subgranular cell layer in the hippocampal dentate gyrus (DG). Previous work in many laboratories has shown explicitly that multipotential, self-renewing stem cells in the subependyma are the source of newly generated migrating neurons that traverse the rostral migratory stream and incorporate into the olfactory bulb as interneurons. These stem cells have been specifically isolated from the subependyma, and their properties of self-renewal and multipotentiality have been demonstrated in vitro. In contrast, it is a widely held assumption that the "hippocampal" stem cells that can be isolated in vitro from adult hippocampus reside in the neurogenic subgranular layer and represent the source of new granule cell neurons, but this has never been tested directly. Primary cell isolates derived from the precise microdissection of adult rodent neurogenic regions were compared using two very different commonly used culture methods: a clonal colony-forming (neurosphere) assay and a monolayer culture system. Importantly, both of these culture methods generated the same conclusion: stem cells can be isolated from hippocampus-adjacent regions of subependyma, but the adult DG proper does not contain a population of resident neural stem cells. Indeed, although the lateral ventricle and other ventricular subependymal regions directly adjacent to the hippocampus contain neural stem cells that exhibit long-term self-renewal and multipotentiality, separate neuronal and glial progenitors with limited self-renewal capacity are present in the adult DG, suggesting that neuron-specific progenitors and not multipotential stem cells are the source of newly generated DG neurons throughout adulthood.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".