MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187459786 · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-94736-x

Author Correction: Rare CASP6N73T variant associated with hippocampal volume exhibits decreased proteolytic activity, synaptic transmission defect, and neurodegeneration

2021· erratum· en· W3187459786 on OpenAlexaff
Libin Zhou, Kwangsik Nho, Maria G. Haddad, Nicole Cherepacha, Agne Tubeleviciute-Aydin, Andy P. Tsai, Andrew J. Saykin, P. Jesper Sjöström, Andréa C. LeBlanc

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2021
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAmino Acid Enzymes and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityMontreal General HospitalJewish General Hospital
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsNeurodegenerationHippocampal formationNeuroscienceNeurotransmissionTransmission (telecommunications)BiologyMedicinePathologyDiseaseComputer scienceBiochemistryReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The original version of this Article contained an error in Fig. 7 g where the density maps in panel (g) were rendered incorrectly due to an error in the custom code. The different cell morphologies were not aligned properly, giving rise to a duplicated image and a widened impression in Fig. 7 g. The original Fig. 7 and accompanying legend appear below. Figure 7 Casp6N73T is less damaging to neuronal function and neurodegeneration than Casp6WT. ( a ) Representative two-photon images of 10 pg Casp6C163A- (Alexa 488, green) and 10 pg Casp6WT- or Casp6N73T- (Alexa 594, red) patched hippocampal CA1 pyramidal neurons. White arrows indicate basal dendrite degeneration. Scale bar: 25 µm. Maximum-intensity projection of two-photon stacks was compiled using ImageJ, and imaging montage of entire neurons was performed using Affinity Designer 1.7. ( b ) Sample EPSP time course plots from Casp6C163A- (green) and Casp6WT- (red) patched neurons in ( a ), showing reduction of neurotransmission for Casp6WT (1.53 ± 0.32 mV, n = 8 vs. 0.14 ± 0.07 mV, n = 8, p < 0.01) but not for Casp6C163A (1.94 ± 0.32 mV, n = 10 vs. 1.91 ± 0.29 mV, n = 10, p = 0.76) when comparing the last 10 traces (light thick line) to the first 10 traces (dark thick line). Open circles: EPSP amplitude recorded every 30 s. Closed circles: EPSP amplitude binned and averaged across 10 traces. Inset: representative EPSP traces highlight the paired-pulse ratio (PPR). Scale bars: 2 mV, 25 ms. Resting membrane potential and input resistance remained stable throughout experiment. ( c ) EPSP time courses for Casp6C163A- (n = 10), Casp6N73T- (n = 8), or Casp6WT- (n = 8) patched neurons. ( d ) PPR from Casp6WT-, Casp6C163A- or Casp6N73T-patched neurons. One-way ANOVA ( p = 0.0043), followed by Tukey’s post-hoc test (** p < 0.01 vs. C163A; # p < 0.05 vs. WT). ( e ) CV analysis of Casp6N73T- and Casp6WT-patched neurons. Casp6C163A was unaltered. ( f ) Representative reconstructions of Casp6C163A-, Casp6N73T-, or Casp6WT-patched neurons. Image stacks were used for manual reconstruction of 3D morphologies using the Neuromantic freeware ( http://www.reading.ac.uk/neuromantic/body_index.php ). ( g ) Dendritic density maps of Casp6C163A- (n = 11), Casp6N73T- (n = 8), or Casp6WT- (n = 8) patched neurons generated using custom software running in Igor Pro 8 v8.04 ( https://www.wavemetrics.com , https://github.com/pj-sjostrom/qMorph ). Dotted lines show the convex hull of the maximum extent. ( h ) Cumulative dendritic length of reconstructed neurons in layers SO, PCL, SR, and SLM. ( i ) Casp6C163A-, Casp6N73T- and Casp6WT-patched CA1 pyramidal neurons beading basal dendrites. One-way ANOVA ( p = 0.0001), followed by Tukey’s test (**** p < 0.0001 vs Casp6C163A, ## p < 0.01 vs Casp6WT). Full size image

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.019

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicAmino Acid Enzymes and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207