Regional expression and ultrastructural localization of EphA7 in the hippocampus and cerebellum of adult rat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
EphA7 is expressed in the adult central nervous system (CNS), where its roles are yet poorly defined. We mapped its distribution using in situ hybridization (ISH) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) combined with light (LM) and electron microscopy (EM) in adult rat and mouse brain. The strongest ISH signal was in the hippocampal pyramidal and granule cell layers. Moderate levels were detected in habenula, striatum, amygdala, the cingulate, piriform and entorhinal cortex, and in cerebellum, notably the Purkinje cell layer. The IHC signal distribution was consistent with ISH results, with transport of the protein to processes, as exemplified in the hippocampal neuropil layers and weakly stained pyramidal cell layers. In contrast, in the cerebellum, the Purkinje cell bodies were the most strongly immunolabeled elements. EM localized the cell surface-expression of EphA7 essentially in postsynaptic densities (PSDs) of dendritic spines and shafts, and on some astrocytic leaflets, in both hippocampus and cerebellum. Perikaryal and dendritic labeling was mostly intracellular, associated with the synthetic and trafficking machineries. Immunopositive vesicles were also observed in axons and axon terminals. Quantitative analysis in EM showed significant differences in the frequency of labeled elements between regions. Notably, labeled dendrites were ∼3-5 times less frequent in cerebellum than in hippocampus, but they were individually endowed with ∼10-40 times higher frequencies of PSDs, on their shafts and spines. The cell surface localization of EphA7, being preferentially in PSDs, and in perisynaptic astrocytic leaflets, provides morphologic evidence that EphA7 plays key roles in adult CNS synaptic maintenance, plasticity, or function. J. Comp. Neurol. 524:2462-2478, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".