MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2287774642 · doi:10.3389/fnins.2015.00494

Doublecortin (DCX) is not Essential for Survival and Differentiation of Newborn Neurons in the Adult Mouse Dentate Gyrus

2016· article· en· W2287774642 on OpenAlexafffund
Jagroop Dhaliwal, Yanwei Xi, Elodie Bruel‐Jungerman, Johanne Germain, Fiona Francis, Diane C. Lagace

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroscience · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSeventh Framework ProgrammeUniversité Pierre et Marie CurieInstitut National de la Santé et de la Recherche MédicaleFondation Bettencourt SchuellerUniversity of OttawaCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFondation Jérôme LejeuneNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean Commission
KeywordsDoublecortinNeurogenesisDentate gyrusHippocampal formationNeuroscienceGene knockdownBiologyNeural stem cellCell biologyStem cellCell cultureGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the adult brain, expression of the microtubule-associated protein Doublecortin (DCX) is associated with neural progenitor cells (NPCs) that give rise to new neurons in the dentate gyrus. Many studies quantify the number of DCX-expressing cells as a proxy for the level of adult neurogenesis, yet no study has determined the effect of removing DCX from adult hippocampal NPCs. Here, we use a retroviral and inducible mouse transgenic approach to either knockdown or knockout DCX from adult NPCs in the dentate gyrus and examine how this affects cell survival and neuronal maturation. Our results demonstrate that shRNA-mediated knockdown of DCX or Cre-mediated recombination in floxed DCX mice does not alter hippocampal neurogenesis and does not change the neuronal fate of the NPCs. Together these findings show that the survival and maturation of adult-generated hippocampal neurons does not require DCX.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.618

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroscienceSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207