MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014061345 · doi:10.1101/2020.03.23.003160

Delineating the relationship between immune system aging and myogenesis in muscle repair

2020· preprint· en· W3014061345 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie W. Tobin, Faisal J. Alibhai, Lukasz Wlodarek, Azadeh Yeganeh, Seán Millar, Jun Wu, Shuhong Li, Richard D. Weisel, Ren‐Ke Li

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMyogenesisImmune systemInflammationMyocyteBone marrowBiologyProinflammatory cytokinePhenotypeImmunologyCytokinePrecursor cellCell biologyAgeingCellCancer researchGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract How aging affects the communication between immune cells and myoblasts during myogenesis is unclear. We therefore investigated how aging impacts the cellular synchronization of these two processes after muscle injury. Muscles of old mice (20 months) had chronic inflammation and fewer satellite cells compared to young mice (3 months). After injury, young mice developed a robust, but transient inflammatory response and a stepwise myogenic gene expression program. These responses were impaired with age. Replacement of old bone marrow (BM) via heterochronic bone marrow transplantation (BMT) increased muscle mass and performance on locomotive and behavioural tests. After injury, Y-O BMT restored the immune cell and cytokine profiles to a young phenotype and enhanced satellite cell activity while O-O BMT amplified a late-onset proinflammatory response. In vitro, conditioned media from young or old macrophages had no effect or impaired myoblast proliferation, respectively. Thus, BM age negatively affects myogenesis by inhibiting myoblast proliferation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicMuscle Physiology and DisordersFrench-language works237,207