SH‐SY5Y and LUHMES cells display differential sensitivity to MPP+, tunicamycin, and epoxomicin in 2D and 3D cell culture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SH-SY5Y and LUHMES cell lines are widely used as model systems for studying neurotoxicity. Most of the existing data regarding the sensitivity of these cell lines to neurotoxicants have been recorded from cells growing as two-dimensional (2D) cultures on the surface of glass or plastic. With the emergence of 3D culture platforms designed to better represent native tissue, there is a growing need to compare the toxicology of neurons grown in 3D environments to those grown in 2D to better understand the impact that culture environment has on toxicant sensitivity. Here, a simple 3D culture method was used to assess the impact of growth environment on the sensitivity of SH-SY5Y cells and LUHMES cells to MPP+, tunicamycin, and epoxomicin, three neurotoxicants that have been previously used to generate experimental models for studying Parkinson's disease pathogenesis. SH-SY5Y cell viability following treatment with these three toxicants was significantly lower in 2D cultures as compared to 3D cultures. On the contrary, LUHMES cells did not show significant differences between growth conditions for any of the toxicants examined. However, LUHMES cells were more sensitive to MPP+, tunicamycin, and epoxomicin than SH-SY5Y cells. Thus, both the choice of cell line and the choice of growth environment must be considered when interpreting in vitro neurotoxicity data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".