MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164860974 · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhi132

Dendritic Plasticity in the Adult Rat Following Middle Cerebral Artery Occlusion and Nogo-A Neutralization

2005· article· en· W2164860974 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine M. Papadopoulos, Shih‐Yen Tsai, Joseph L. Cheatwood, Melanie R. Bollnow, Bryan Kolb, Martin E. Schwab, Gwendolyn L. Kartje

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebral Cortex · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeU.S. Department of Veterans AffairsNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDendritic spineLesionNeuroscienceAxonNeuroplasticityCortex (anatomy)SproutingBiologyCerebral cortexMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our work has shown that following focal ischemic lesion in adult rats, neutralization of the axon growth inhibitor Nogo-A with the monoclonal antibody (mAb) IN-1 results in functional recovery. Furthermore, new axonal connections were formed from the contralesional cortex to subcortical areas corresponding to the observed functional recovery. The present study investigated whether dendritic changes, also known to subserve functional recovery, paralleled the axonal plasticity shown after ischemic lesion and treatment with mAb IN-1. Golgi-Cox-stained layer V pyramidal neurons in the contralesional sensorimotor cortex were examined for evidence of dendritic sprouting. Results demonstrated increased dendritic arborization and spine density in the mAb IN-1-treated animals with lesion. Interestingly, administration of mAb IN-1 without lesion resulted in transient dendritic outgrowth with no change in spine density. These results suggest a novel role for Nogo-A in limiting dendritic plasticity after stroke.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations132
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebral CortexSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207