Cell specificity of Manganese-enhanced MRI signal in the cerebellum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) resolution continues to improve, making it important to understand the cellular basis for different MRI contrast mechanisms. Manganese-enhanced MRI (MEMRI) produces layer-specific contrast throughout the brain enabling in vivo visualization of cellular cytoarchitecture, particularly in the cerebellum. Due to the unique geometry of the cerebellum, especially near the midline, 2D MEMRI images can be acquired from a relatively thick slice by averaging through areas of uniform morphology and cytoarchitecture to produce very high-resolution visualization of sagittal planes. In such images, MEMRI hyperintensity is uniform in thickness throughout the anterior-posterior axis of sagittal sections and is centrally located in the cerebellar cortex. These signal features suggested that the Purkinje cell layer, which houses the cell bodies of the Purkinje cells and the Bergmann glia, is the source of hyperintensity. Despite this circumstantial evidence, the cellular source of MRI contrast has been difficult to define. In this study, we quantified the effects of selective ablation of Purkinje cells or Bergmann glia on cerebellar MEMRI signal to determine whether signal could be assigned to one cell type. We found that the Purkinje cells, not the Bergmann glia, are the primary of source of the enhancement in the Purkinje cell layer. This cell-ablation strategy should be useful for determining the cell specificity of other MRI contrast mechanisms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".