MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W262582789 · doi:10.3791/52732

Isolation of Neural Stem/Progenitor Cells from the Periventricular Region of the Adult Rat and Human Spinal Cord

2015· article· en· W262582789 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrea J. Mothe, Charles H. Tator

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoKrembil Foundation
FundersPhysicians' Services Incorporated Foundation
KeywordsNeurosphereNeural stem cellProgenitor cellCell biologyBiologyStem cellAdult stem cellMultipotent Stem CellSpinal cordNeuroepithelial cellFibroblast growth factorImmunologyEndothelial stem cellNeuroscienceIn vitroBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adult rat and human spinal cord neural stem/progenitor cells (NSPCs) cultured in growth factor-enriched medium allows for the proliferation of multipotent, self-renewing, and expandable neural stem cells. In serum conditions, these multipotent NSPCs will differentiate, generating neurons, astrocytes, and oligodendrocytes. The harvested tissue is enzymatically dissociated in a papain-EDTA solution and then mechanically dissociated and separated through a discontinuous density gradient to yield a single cell suspension which is plated in neurobasal medium supplemented with epidermal growth factor (EGF), basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF), and heparin. Adult rat spinal cord NSPCs are cultured as free-floating neurospheres and adult human spinal cord NSPCs are grown as adherent cultures. Under these conditions, adult spinal cord NSPCs proliferate, express markers of precursor cells, and can be continuously expanded upon passage. These cells can be studied in vitro in response to various stimuli, and exogenous factors may be used to promote lineage restriction to examine neural stem cell differentiation. Multipotent NSPCs or their progeny can also be transplanted into various animal models to assess regenerative repair.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations23
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207