MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2584577396 · doi:10.1038/srep41756

Young Bone-Marrow Sca-1+ Stem Cells Rejuvenate the Aged Heart and Improve Function after Injury through PDGFRβ-Akt pathway

2017· article· en· W2584577396 on OpenAlexafffund
Shuhong Li, Lu Sun, Lei Yang, Li Jiao, Zhengbo Shao, Guoqing Du, Jun Wu, Richard D. Weisel, Ren‐Ke Li

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsHoming (biology)Stem cellBone marrowProgenitor cellCancer researchBiologyBone Marrow Stem CellProtein kinase BMedicineImmunologyCell biologySignal transduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bone marrow (BM) reconstitution with young BM cells in aged recipients restores the functionality of cardiac resident BM-derived progenitors. This study investigated the cell type primarily responsible for this effect. We reconstituted old mice with BM cells from young or old mice and found that the number of stem cell antigen 1 (Sca-1) cells homing to the heart was significantly greater in young than old chimeras. We then reconstituted old mice with young BM Sca-1 + or Sca-1 − cells. We found that Sca-1 cells repopulated the recipient BM and homed to the heart. The number of BM-derived cells in the aged myocardium co-expressing PDGFRβ was 3 times greater in Sca-1 + than Sca-1 − chimeric mice. Sca-1 + chimeras had more active cell proliferation in the infarcted heart and improved ventricular function after MI. The improved regeneration involved activation of the PDGFRβ/Akt/p27 Kip1 pathway. Sca-1 + stem cells rejuvenated cardiac tissue in aged mice. Restoration of the Sca-1 + subset of stem cells by BM reconstitution improved cardiac tissue regeneration after injury in aged mice.

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)0.002
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 score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.704

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations51
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineFrench-language works237,207