MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186792926 · doi:10.3390/ijms22158025

The Temporal Mechanisms Guiding Interneuron Differentiation in the Spinal Cord

2021· review· en· W3186792926 on OpenAlexafffund
Dylan Deska‐Gauthier, Ying Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInterneuronNeuroscienceNeurogenesisZebrafishBiologySpinal cordBiological neural networkInhibitory postsynaptic potential

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurogenesis timing is an essential developmental mechanism for neuronal diversity and organization throughout the central nervous system. In the mouse spinal cord, growing evidence is beginning to reveal that neurogenesis timing acts in tandem with spatial molecular controls to diversify molecularly and functionally distinct post-mitotic interneuron subpopulations. Particularly, in some cases, this temporal ordering of interneuron differentiation has been shown to instruct specific sensorimotor circuit wirings. In zebrafish, in vivo preparations have revealed that sequential neurogenesis waves of interneurons and motor neurons form speed-dependent locomotor circuits throughout the spinal cord and brainstem. In the present review, we discuss temporal principals of interneuron diversity taken from both mouse and zebrafish systems highlighting how each can lend illuminating insights to the other. Moving forward, it is important to combine the collective knowledge from different systems to eventually understand how temporally regulated subpopulation function differentially across speed- and/or state-dependent sensorimotor movement tasks.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.381
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular SciencesSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207