MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969681965 · doi:10.1016/j.neuro.2019.08.007

25-hydroxycholesterol impairs neuronal and muscular development in zebrafish

2019· article· en· W2969681965 on OpenAlexafffund
Priyanka Jamadagni, Shunmoogum A. Patten

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroToxicology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholesterol and Lipid Metabolism
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueArmand Frappier Museum
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFondation Brain CanadaALS Society of Canada
KeywordsZebrafishBiologySpinal cordIn vivoNervous systemCentral nervous systemMotor neuronAxonNeuroscienceCell biologyEndocrinologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oxysterols have essential effects on brain homeostasis and their levels are often altered in neurodegenerative and neuroinflammatory diseases. Several studies have demonstrated the cytotoxic effects of 25-HC on different cell lines, however, not much is known about its effects on neurons in vivo. In this study, we examined the effects of 25-HC exposure on the nervous system development in the zebrafish. We showed that survival rate of zebrafish embryos/larvae is significantly decreased at doses of 25-HC above 40 μM. 25-HC was found to affect the motility of zebrafish larvae, primary motor axon and muscle morphology. Furthermore, larvae treated with 25-HC showed a reduced neuronal network and number of HuC-positive cells in the brain. An increased cell death was also observed in both the brain and spinal cord of zebrafish treated with 25-HC. Interestingly, administration of 25-HC at later stages of development (24 and 48 h post fertilization) had no detrimental effects on motor axons. Altogether, our findings show that elevated levels of 25-HC may have important consequences on neuronal development and cell survival.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.730

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.249
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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroToxicologySame topicCholesterol and Lipid MetabolismFrench-language works237,207