MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161785288 · doi:10.1002/cne.20575

Ltrk is differentially expressed in developing and adult neurons of the <i>Lymnaea</i> central nervous system

2005· article· en· W2161785288 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew G. M. Bulloch, Chi Que Diep, Cairine Logan, Estrella S. Bulloch, Stephen M. Robbins, Jonathan Hislop, Wayne S. Sossin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Comparative Neurology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Heritage Foundation for Medical ResearchCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsBiologyLymnaeaIn situ hybridizationNeuroscienceCentral nervous systemVertebrateTrk receptorNervous systemAxonJuvenileSpinal cordLymnaea stagnalisReceptorMessenger RNANeurotrophinGeneticsEcologySnail

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Trk receptor family plays diverse roles in both development and plasticity of the vertebrate nervous system. Ltrk is a related receptor that is expressed in the CNS of the mollusk Lymnaea, although little is known of its cellular distribution. This study provides three independent lines of evidence (based on RT-PCR, in situ hybridization, and immunohistochemistry) that Ltrk is universally expressed by neurons and dorsal body cells of both the juvenile and the adult Lymnaea CNS. The highest level of expression by neuronal somata occurs in the late juvenile stage, whereas axon collaterals express high levels throughout the animal's life span. Our data support multifunctional roles for Ltrk that parallel those of its mammalian counterparts.

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations7
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Comparative NeurologySame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207