MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164042016 · doi:10.1242/jcs.132076

Activity-dependent secretion of progranulin from synapses

2013· article· en· W2164042016 on OpenAlexafffund
Eugenia Petoukhov, Sarah Fernando, Fergil Mills, Farhan Shivji, Diana V. Hunter, Charles Krieger, Michael Silverman, Shernaz X. Bamji

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cell Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologySynapseNeuroscienceHaploinsufficiencyNeurotrophic factorsSecretionNeuriteCell biologyHippocampal formationPhenotypeGeneReceptorEndocrinologyGeneticsIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The secreted growth factor progranulin (PGRN) has been shown to be important for regulating neuronal survival and outgrowth, as well as synapse formation and function. Mutations in the PGRN gene that result in PGRN haploinsufficiency have been identified as a major cause of frontotemporal dementia (FTD). Here we demonstrate that PGRN is colocalized with dense-core vesicle markers and is co-transported with brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) within axons and dendrites of cultured hippocampal neurons in both anterograde and retrograde directions. We also show that PGRN is secreted in an activity-dependent manner from synaptic and extrasynaptic sites, and that the temporal profiles of secretion are distinct in axons and dendrites. Neuronal activity is also shown to increase the recruitment of PGRN to synapses and to enhance the density of PGRN clusters along axons. Finally, treatment of neurons with recombinant PGRN is shown to increase synapse density, while decreasing the size of the presynaptic compartment and specifically the number of synaptic vesicles per synapse. Together, this indicates that activity-dependent secretion of PGRN can regulate synapse number and 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.382
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations52
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cell ScienceSame topicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis ResearchFrench-language works237,207