Transcriptional response to Wnt activation regulates the regenerative capacity of the mammalian cochlea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Lack of sensory hair cell (HC) regeneration in mammalian adults is a major contributor to hearing loss. In contrast, the neonatal mouse cochlea retains a transient capacity for regeneration, and forced Wnt activation in neonatal stages promotes supporting cell (SC) proliferation and induction of ectopic HCs. We currently know little about the temporal pattern and underlying mechanism of this age-dependent regenerative response. Using an in vitro model, we show that Wnt activation promotes SC proliferation following birth, but prior to postnatal day (P) 5. This age-dependent decline in proliferation occurs despite evidence that the Wnt pathway is postnatally active and can be further enhanced by Wnt stimulators. Using an in vivo mouse model and RNA sequencing, we show that proliferation in the early neonatal cochlea is correlated with a unique transcriptional response that diminishes with age. Furthermore, we find that augmenting Wnt signaling through the neonatal stages extends the window for HC induction in response to Notch signaling inhibition. Our results suggest that the downstream transcriptional response to Wnt activation, in part, underlies the regenerative capacity of the mammalian cochlea.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".