Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Abstract SCI-42 For many years a distinction was drawn between prospectively separable murine HSC populations with long-term, essentially permanent reconstituting potential (LT-HSC), versus HSC populations yielding short-term engraftment lasting only 4 – 6 weeks after transplantation (ST-HSC). Recent work based on transplantation of single cells shows that highly purified populations of LT-HSC prepared by standard sorting parameters consist in fact predominantly of a distinct, newly recognized class of intermediate- term reconstituting cells (IT-HSC) whose grafts endure longer than short-term HSC but also eventually fail (1). IT-HSC are separable from long-term reconstituting cells on the basis of expression of more alpha2 integrin and less SLAM150. Crucial to recognition of the distinction between LT- and IT-HSC are the endpoints used to evaluate reconstitution. If blood erythroid or myeloid reconstitution is measured, IT reconstitution is readily distinguished by the disappearance of these elements by 16 wk post-transplant. If instead reconstitution is measured simply by presence of blood leukocytes of donor origin, which in the mouse are almost entirely lymphocytes, the distinction is not made because lymphoid elements persist even in fading IT clones to 24 wk or beyond. The observations imply a need for reinterpretation of most of the published descriptions of the biology and gene expression profiles previously attributed to LT-HSC but in fact derived from analysis of populations that consisted mainly of IT-HSC. The capacity now to separate LT- from IT-HSC creates new opportunities for probing the mechanisms that specify and sustain long term function in the former but not the latter. 1. Benveniste P, Frelin C, Janmohamed S, Barbara M, Herrington R, Hyam D, Iscove NN. Intermediate-term hematopoietic stem cells with extended but time-limited reconstitution potential. Cell Stem Cell. 2010;6:48–58 Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".