MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890693517 · doi:10.1242/dev.157719

A non-canonical role for the proneural gene<i>Neurog1</i>as a negative regulator of neocortical neurogenesis

2018· article· en· W2890693517 on OpenAlexafffund
Sisu Han, Daniel J. Dennis, Anjali Balakrishnan, Rajiv Dixit, Olivier Britz, Dawn Zinyk, Yacine Touahri, Thomas Olender, Marjorie Brand, François Guillemot, Deborah M. Kurrasch

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of TorontoAlberta Children's HospitalSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCancer Research UKWellcome Trust
KeywordsNeurogenesisBiologyProneural genesCell biologyProgenitor cellNeural stem cellProgenitorStem cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neural progenitors undergo temporal identity transitions to sequentially generate the neuronal and glial cells that make up the mature brain. Proneural genes have well characterized roles in promoting neural cell differentiation and subtype specification, but they also regulate the timing of identity transitions through poorly understood mechanisms. Here we investigated how the highly-related proneural genes Neurog1 and Neurog2 interact to control the timing of neocortical neurogenesis. We found that Neurog1 acts in an atypical fashion as it is required to suppress rather than promote neuronal differentiation in early corticogenesis. In Neurog1−/− neocortices, early-born neurons differentiate in excess, while in vitro, Neurog1−/− progenitors have a decreased propensity to proliferate and form neurospheres. Instead, Neurog1−/− progenitors preferentially generate neurons, a phenotype restricted to the Neurog2+ progenitor pool. Mechanistically, Neurog1 and Neurog2 heterodimerize, and while Neurog1 and Neurog2 individually promote neurogenesis, misexpression together blocks this effect. Finally, Neurog1 is also required to induce the expression of neurogenic factors (Dll1, Hes5) and repress the expression of neuronal differentiation genes (Fezf2, Neurod6). Neurog1 thus employs different mechanisms to temper the pace of early neocortical neurogenesis.

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)0.001
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.930

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations38
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmentSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207