Morphological analysis of dentate granule neurons in the mouse model of Fragile‐X syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fragile X syndrome (FXS) is the most commonly inherited form of mental retardation and is characterized by the absence of the expression of the fragile‐X mental retardation protein (FMRP) from the Fmr1 gene. It is postulated that dendritic spine abnormalities may underlie intellectual impairment in FXS. The current research was conducted to investigate the morphological changes associated with FXS specifically within the dentate gyrus (DG) of the hippocampus. Animals were genotyped and the brains from Fmr1 knockout (KO) mice and wild‐type (WT) littermates were processed for Golgi‐Cox staining and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). Dendrites of dentate granule neurons from the molecular layer were examined and their spines quantified. Golgi‐Cox analysis by light microscopy revealed fewer spines in the DG of the mouse model of FXS. TEM data analysis showed a trend towards fewer spine apparati in dendritic spines and increased thin spines in Fmr1 KO mice. These data indicate that there are fewer dendritic spines which may be less mature in appearance in the DG of the mouse model of FXS, contrasting findings from other regions of the brain (e.g., visual cortex). These results provide new data on the structure‐function relationship between dendritic spine abnormalities and intellectual impairment in FXS.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".