MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886051951 · doi:10.1038/s41467-018-05473-1

Locomotor recovery following contusive spinal cord injury does not require oligodendrocyte remyelination

2018· article· en· W2886051951 on OpenAlexafffund
Greg J. Duncan, Sohrab B. Manesh, Brett J. Hilton, Peggy Assinck, Jie Liu, Aaron J. Moulson, Jason R. Plemel, Wolfram Tetzlaff

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta InnovatesMultiple Sclerosis SocietyMultiple Sclerosis Society of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsRemyelinationOligodendrocyteMyelinSpinal cord injurySpinal cordRegeneration (biology)MedicineNeuroscienceProgenitor cellCentral nervous systemBiologyCell biologyStem cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Remyelination occurs after spinal cord injury (SCI) but its functional relevance is unclear. We assessed the necessity of myelin regulatory factor (Myrf) in remyelination after contusive SCI by deleting the gene from platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha positive (PDGFRα-positive) oligodendrocyte progenitor cells (OPCs) in mice prior to SCI. While OPC proliferation and density are not altered by Myrf inducible knockout after SCI, the accumulation of new oligodendrocytes is largely prevented. This greatly inhibits myelin regeneration, resulting in a 44% reduction in myelinated axons at the lesion epicenter. However, spontaneous locomotor recovery after SCI is not altered by remyelination failure. In controls with functional MYRF, locomotor recovery precedes the onset of most oligodendrocyte myelin regeneration. Collectively, these data demonstrate that MYRF expression in PDGFRα-positive cell derived oligodendrocytes is indispensable for myelin regeneration following contusive SCI but that oligodendrocyte remyelination is not required for spontaneous recovery of stepping.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.670
Threshold uncertainty score0.803

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.382 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations105
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207