Ceramide Inhibits Axonal Growth and Nerve Growth Factor Uptake without Compromising the Viability of Sympathetic Neurons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ceramide inhibits axonal growth of cultured rat sympathetic neurons when the ceramide content of distal axons, but not cell bodies, is increased (Posse de Chaves, E. I., Bussiere, M. Vance, D. E., Campenot, R. B., and Vance, J.E. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 3028-3035). We now report that inhibition of growth does not result from cell death since although ceramide is a known apoptotic agent, C(6)-ceramide given to the neurons for 24 h did not cause cell death but instead protected the neurons from death induced by deprivation of nerve growth factor (NGF). We also find that a pool of ceramide generated from sphingomyelin in distal axons, but not cell bodies, inhibits axonal growth. Analysis of endogenous sphingomyelinase activities demonstrated that distal axons are rich in neutral sphingomyelinase activity but contain almost no acidic sphingomyelinase, which is concentrated in cell bodies/proximal axons. Together, these observations are consistent with the idea that generation of ceramide from sphingomyelin by a neutral sphingomyelinase in axons inhibits axonal growth. Furthermore, we demonstrate that treatment of distal axons with ceramide inhibits the uptake of NGF and low density lipoproteins by distal axons by approximately 70 and 40%, respectively, suggesting that the inhibition of axonal growth by ceramide might be due, at least in part, to impaired endocytosis of NGF. However, inhibition of endocytosis of NGF by ceramide could not be ascribed to decreased phosphorylation of TrkA.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".