MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606476293 · doi:10.1093/jnen/nlx006

Cellular Senescence in Mouse Hippocampus After Irradiation and the Role of p53 and p21

2017· article· en· W2606476293 on OpenAlexaff
Zoey Cheng, Yan Zhen Zheng, Yuqing Li, C. Shun Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuropathology & Experimental Neurology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelomeres, Telomerase, and Senescence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDentate gyrusSenescenceCDKN2ABiologyHippocampusCell biologyMolecular biologyGeneEndocrinologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diverse stress signals including irradiation may trigger cellular senescence. We asked whether irradiation induced senescence in mouse hippocampus, and whether p53 or p21 played a role in this response. Following whole-brain irradiation, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) arrays for senescence-associated genes showed increased expression of CDKN1A (p21) and CDKN2A (p19ARF) in mouse hippocampus at 9 weeks. Upregulation of p21 and p19ARF was confirmed using real-time PCR, which also demonstrated increased CDKN2A/p16INKa expression after irradiation. No altered regulation of another 17 senescence-associated genes was observed after irradiation. Immunohistochemistry revealed increased nuclear expression of p16INK4A, p19ARF, p53, p21, phosphorylated p38 (pp38), 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal, and interleukin-6 (IL6) in granule cells of dentate gyrus after irradiation. Increased p16 nuclear immunoreactivity was further observed in type -1 cells, the putative neural stem cells. γ-phosphorylated-histone-2A nuclear foci were also seen in dentate gyrus 9 weeks postirradiation. In nonirradiated mice knockout of the TRP53 or p21 gene, there was increased p16INK4A, p19ARF, and IL6, but not pp38 in dentate gyrus. We conclude that irradiation induces transcript and protein expression profile alterations in mouse dentate gyrus consistent with the senescence phenotype. Absence of p53 or p21 results in increase in baseline expression of senescence markers with no further increase in expression after irradiation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations31
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuropathology & Experimental NeurologySame topicTelomeres, Telomerase, and SenescenceFrench-language works237,207