MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Localization of nuclear and membrane progesterone receptors in the brainstem of adult mice

2012· article· en· W3175590620 on OpenAlexaff
Vincent Joseph, Karim Habbal, Roumiana Goulemetova

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrainstemNucleusMedullaReceptorImmunohistochemistryCatecholaminergic cell groupsCatecholaminergicBiologyStainingMedulla oblongataEndocrinologyInternal medicineChemistryCell biologyCentral nervous systemNeuroscienceBiochemistryMedicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used immunohistochemistry to determine the localization of progesterone receptors (PR) in respiratory‐related areas in the brainstem of adult male mice. Serial slices were incubated with antibodies against nuclear PR (nPR), or membrane α and β PR (mPRα and mPRβ). A prominent staining for nPR, mPRα, and mPRβ appeared in caudal and rostral parts of the nucleus tractus solitarius (NTS), X and XII nuclei, but while nPR and mPRα stained cell bodies, mPRβ stained fibers. With double fluorescence labeling we showed that mPRα is co‐localized in catecholaminergic neurons (TH + ) in NTS, and in motoneurons in X and XII nuclei (VGLUT2 + ). mPRβ is expressed in TH + and VGLUT2 + fibers in these regions. A dense staining for nPR and mPRβ appeared in the ventrolateral medulla, in a region corresponding to the pre‐botzinger complex, and 3β‐HSD (an enzyme involved in progesterone synthesis) was also densily expressed in these regions. This suggests that local progesterone synthesis modulate respiratory function.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep→French-language works237,207→