DCC Is Required for the Development of Nociceptive Topognosis in Mice and Humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Avoidance of environmental dangers depends on nociceptive topognosis, or the ability to localize painful stimuli. This is proposed to rely on somatotopic maps arising from topographically organized point-to-point connections between the body surface and the CNS. To determine the role of topographic organization of spinal ascending projections in nociceptive topognosis, we generated a conditional knockout mouse lacking expression of the netrin1 receptor DCC in the spinal cord. These mice have an increased number of ipsilateral spinothalamic connections and exhibit aberrant activation of the somatosensory cortex in response to unilateral stimulation. Furthermore, spinal cord-specific Dcc knockout animals displayed mislocalized licking responses to formalin injection, indicating impaired topognosis. Similarly, humans with DCC mutations experience bilateral sensation evoked by unilateral somatosensory stimulation. Collectively, our results constitute functional evidence of the importance of topographic organization of spinofugal connections for nociceptive topognosis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".