Neuronal repopulation into arcuate nucleus of hypothalamus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent evidences suggest that neurogenesis could occur in different zones of the central nervous system. Objective: with the purpose of analyzing neurogenesis, we have done a study in the arcuate nucleus of hypothalamus after administration of glutamate and epidermal growth factor (EGF) plus fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF-2). Material and Methods: we have used the electron and light microscopy, immunocytochemistry and immunoflourescence studies and the organotypic cultures. The markers used were NeuN, neurogenin, Tuj 1, CD24, lycopersicum sculetum, DARPP32, vimentin, nestin, PSA-NCAM, caspase 9, BrdU and 3HT. We used rats (P4), the time of sacrifice was at 3 h, 6 h, 12 h, 36 h, 15 d, 30 d, 90 d and 120 d. This research has been divided in 3 experiments. Experiment A, we administrated BrdU (100 mg/kg) and we detected the cellular proliferation. Experiment B, we used glutamate (4 mg/g, sc), and we observed the cellular death. Experiment C, we used glutamate, BrdU and EGF+FGF-2 (5 ng/g, sc). Results and conclusions: the results obtained indicate that we can induce the neuronal regeneration of the arcuate nucleus by means of use of EGF and FGF-2, and we identify the third ventricle like a zone of neurogenesis.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".