MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133907890 · doi:10.1073/pnas.2015505118

<i>Dlk1</i> dosage regulates hippocampal neurogenesis and cognition

2021· article· en· W3133907890 on OpenAlexaff
Raquel Montalbán-Loro, Glenda Lassi, Anna Lozano-Ureña, Ana Pérez‐Villalba, Esteban Jiménez-Villalba, Marika Charalambous, Giorgio Vallortígara, Alexa E. Horner, Lisa M. Saksida, Timothy J. Bussey, José Luís Trejo, Valter Tucci, Anne C. Ferguson‐Smith, Sacri R. Ferrón

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Syndromes and Imprinting
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersMedical Research CouncilBanco Bilbao Vizcaya ArgentariaGeneralitat ValencianaMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadEuropean CommissionMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónWellcome TrustFundación BBVA
KeywordsNeurogenesisSubgranular zoneSubventricular zoneDentate gyrusHippocampal formationHippocampusNeuroscienceLateral ventriclesBiologyCognitionNeural stem cellPsychologyStem cellCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significance Generation of new neurons occurs normally in the adult brain in two locations: the subventricular zone (SVZ) in the walls of the lateral ventricles and the subgranular zone (SGZ) in the dentate gyrus (DG) of the hippocampus. Neurogenesis in the adult hippocampus has been implicated in cognitive functions such as learning, memory, and recovery of stress response. Imprinted genes are highly prevalent in the brain and have adult and developmental important functions. Genetic deletion of the imprinted gene Dlk1 from either parental allele shows that DLK1 is a key mediator of quiescence in adult hippocampal NSCs. Additionally, Dlk1 is exquisitely dosage sensitive in the brain with perturbations in levels resulting in impaired NSCs function and cognitive phenotypes.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 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

Citations37
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicGenetic Syndromes and ImprintingFrench-language works237,207