Heat shock protein 25 expression and preferential Purkinje cell survival in the <i>lurcher</i> mutant mouse cerebellum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The spatial organization of the mouse cerebellum into transverse zones and parasagittal stripes is reflected during the temporal progression of Purkinje cell death in the Lurcher mutant mouse (+/Lc). Neurodegeneration in the +/Lc mutant is apparent by the second postnatal week and is initially seen in all four transverse zones: the anterior (lobules I-V), central (lobules VI, VII), posterior (lobules VIII, dorsal IX), and nodular (ventral lobule IX and lobule X) zone. However, from postnatal day (P)25-P36, Purkinje cell loss proceeds more rapidly in the anterior zone, followed by the posterior and central zones, and is significantly delayed in the nodular zone. Coronal sections through the +/Lc cerebellum reveal that surviving Purkinje cells are restricted to the paraflocculus/flocculus and the nodular zone and could be detected as late as P146 (approximately 5 months). Within this region, the pattern of preferentially surviving calbindin-immunoreactive Purkinje cells reflects the expression of the constitutively expressed small heat shock protein HSP25 in the wild-type cerebellum. Although the role of constitutively expressed HSP25 in the wild-type cerebellum is not clear, it appears to play a neuroprotective role in the flocculonodular region of the +/Lc mutant cerebellum as the percentage of surviving Purkinje cells that are HSP25-immunopositive significantly increases over time.
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) | 0.002 | 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".