Midbrain tectal stem cells display diverse regenerative capacities in zebrafish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How diverse adult stem and progenitor populations regenerate tissue following damage to the brain is poorly understood. In highly regenerative vertebrates, such as zebrafish, radial-glia (RG) and neuro-epithelial-like (NE) stem/progenitor cells contribute to neuronal repair after injury. However, not all RG act as neural stem/progenitor cells during homeostasis in the zebrafish brain, questioning the role of quiescent RG (qRG) post-injury. To understand the function of qRG during regeneration, we performed a stab lesion in the adult midbrain tectum to target a population of homeostatic qRG, and investigated their proliferative behaviour, differentiation potential, and Wnt/β-catenin signalling. EdU-labelling showed a small number of proliferating qRG after injury (pRG) but that progeny are restricted to RG. However, injury promoted proliferation of NE progenitors in the internal tectal marginal zone (TMZi) resulting in amplified regenerative neurogenesis. Increased Wnt/β-catenin signalling was detected in TMZi after injury whereas homeostatic levels of Wnt/β-catenin signalling persisted in qRG/pRG. Attenuation of Wnt signalling suggested that the proliferative response post-injury was Wnt/β-catenin-independent. Our results demonstrate that qRG in the tectum have restricted capability in neuronal repair, highlighting that RG have diverse functions in the zebrafish brain. Furthermore, these findings suggest that endogenous stem cell compartments compensate lost tissue by amplifying homeostatic growth.
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 | 0.001 | 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".