MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376225670 · doi:10.1096/fj.202300057r

USP25 contributes to defective neurogenesis and cognitive impairments

2023· article· en· W4376225670 on OpenAlexaff
Fang Cai, Beibei Song, Yi Yang, Haikang Liao, Ran Li, Zhao Wang, Ruixue Cao, Huaqiu Chen, Juelu Wang, Yili Wu, Yun Zhang, Weihong Song

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicUbiquitin and proteasome pathways
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsNeurogenesisHippocampusNeuroscienceNeural stem cellNeocortexBiologyPsychologyStem cellCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Both Down syndrome (DS) individuals and animal models exhibit hypo-cellularity in hippocampus and neocortex indicated by enhanced neuronal death and compromised neurogenesis. Ubiquitin-specific peptidase 25 (USP25), a human chromosome 21 (HSA21) gene, encodes for a deubiquitinating enzyme overexpressed in DS patients. Dysregulation of USP25 has been associated with Alzheimer's phenotypes in DS, but its role in defective neurogenesis in DS has not been defined. In this study, we found that USP25 upregulation impaired cell cycle regulation during embryonic neurogenesis and cortical development. Overexpression of USP25 in hippocampus promoted the neural stem cells to glial cell fates and suppressed neuronal cell fate by altering the balance between cyclin D1 and cyclin D2, thus reducing neurogenesis in the hippocampus. USP25-Tg mice showed increased anxiety/depression-like behaviors and learning and memory deficits. These results suggested that USP25 overexpression resulted in defective neurogenesis and cognitive impairments, which could contribute to the pathogenesis of DS. USP25 may be a potential pharmaceutical target for DS.

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)0.000
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicUbiquitin and proteasome pathwaysFrench-language works237,207