MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2396095339 · doi:10.1007/978-1-62703-128-8_30

Methods to Culture, Differentiate, and Characterize Neural Stem Cells from the Adult and Embryonic Mouse Central Nervous System

2012· article· en· W2396095339 on OpenAlexaff
Sharon A. Louis, Carmen K. H. Mak, Brent A. Reynolds

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsStemcell Technologies
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurosphereNeural stem cellEmbryonic stem cellBiologyProgenitor cellCentral nervous systemIn vitroNeuroscienceCell biologyStem cellNeural cellAdult stem cellCellGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the discovery of neural stem cells (NSC) in the embryonic and adult mammalian central nervous system (CNS), there have been a growing numbers of tissue culture media and protocols to study and functionally characterize NSCs and its progeny in vitro. One of these culture systems introduced in 1992 is referred to as the Neurosphere Assay, and it has been widely used to isolate, expand, differentiate and even quantify NSC populations. Several years later because its application as a quantitative in vitro assay for measuring NSC frequency was limited, a new single-step semisolid based assay, the Neural Colony Forming Cell (NCFC) assay was developed to accurately measure NSC numbers. The NCFC assay allows the discrimination between NSCs and progenitors by the size of colonies they produce (i.e., their proliferative potential). The evolution and continued improvements made to these tissue culture tools will facilitate further advances in the promising application of NSCs for therapeutic use.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations50
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biologySame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207