MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4225525988 · doi:10.1007/978-1-0716-1990-2_13

Retrograde Axonal Transport of Neurotrophins in Basal Forebrain Cholinergic Neurons

2022· article· en· W4225525988 on OpenAlexafffund
Arman Shekari, Margaret Fahnestock

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBasal forebrainNeuroscienceCholinergic neuronAxoplasmic transportNeurotrophinCholinergicBasal (medicine)BiologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Axonal transport is key for the survival and function of all neurons. This process is especially important in basal forebrain cholinergic neurons due to their extremely long and diffuse axonal projections. These neurons are critical for learning and memory and degenerate rapidly in age-related neurodegenerative disorders like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease. The vulnerability of these neurons to age-related neurodegeneration may be partially attributed to their reliance on retrograde axonal transport for neurotrophic support. Unfortunately, little is known about the molecular biology underlying the retrograde transport dynamics of these neurons due to the difficulty associated with their maintenance in vitro. Here, we outline a protocol for culturing primary rodent basal forebrain cholinergic neurons in microfluidic chambers, devices designed specifically for the study of axonal transport in vitro. We outline protocols for labeling neurotrophins and tracking neurotrophin transport in these neurons. Our protocols can also be used to study axonal transport in other types of primary neurons such as cortical and hippocampal neurons.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biology→Same topicNerve injury and regeneration→French-language works237,207→