MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204799713 · doi:10.1186/s13041-022-00918-7

Transmembrane protein 108 inhibits the proliferation and myelination of oligodendrocyte lineage cells in the corpus callosum

2022· article· en· W3204799713 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Brain · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of SciencesNanchang UniversityHangzhou Normal UniversityNatural Science Foundation of Jiangxi ProvinceChinese Academy of SciencesInstitute of GeneticsNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsOligodendrocyteCorpus callosumTransmembrane proteinProgenitor cellCell growthPsychopharmacologyLineage (genetic)Progenitor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Abnormal white matter is a common neurobiological change in bipolar disorder, and dysregulation of myelination in oligodendrocytes (OLs) is the cause. Transmembrane protein 108 (Tmem108), as a susceptible gene of bipolar disorder, is expressed higher in OL lineage cells than any other lineage cells in the central nervous system. Moreover, Tmem108 mutant mice exhibit mania-like behaviors, belonging to one of the signs of bipolar disorder. However, it is unknown whether Tmem108 regulates the myelination of the OLs. RESULTS: Tmem108 expression in the corpus callosum decreased with the development, and OL progenitor cell proliferation and OL myelination were enhanced in the mutant mice. Moreover, the mutant mice exhibited mania-like behavior after acute restraint stress and were susceptible to drug-induced epilepsy. CONCLUSIONS: Tmem108 inhibited OL progenitor cell proliferation and mitigated OL maturation in the corpus callosum, which may also provide a new role of Tmem108 involving bipolar disorder pathogenesis.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular BrainSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207