MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Plant Cellulose as a Substrate for 3D Neural Stem Cell Culture

2023· article· en· W4388636496 on OpenAlexafffund
Lauren Couvrette, Krystal L. A. Walker, Tuan V. Bui, Andrew E. Pelling

Bibliographic record

VenueBioengineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchLi Ka Shing Foundation
KeywordsNeural stem cellNeural tissue engineeringScaffoldSpinal cord injuryNestinCelluloseStem cell3D bioprintingCell biologyDecellularizationMesenchymal stem cellTissue engineeringGlial fibrillary acidic proteinBiologyMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringNeuroscienceMedicineSpinal cordBiochemistryImmunologyImmunohistochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neural stem cell (NSC)-based therapies are at the forefront of regenerative medicine strategies for various neural defects and injuries such as stroke, traumatic brain injury, and spinal cord injury. For several clinical applications, NSC therapies require biocompatible scaffolds to support cell survival and to direct differentiation. Here, we investigate decellularized plant tissue as a novel scaffold for three-dimensional (3D), in vitro culture of NSCs. Plant cellulose scaffolds were shown to support the attachment and proliferation of adult rat hippocampal neural stem cells (NSCs). Further, NSCs differentiated on the cellulose scaffold had significant increases in their expression of neuron-specific beta-III tubulin and glial fibrillary acidic protein compared to 2D culture on a polystyrene plate, indicating that the scaffold may enhance the differentiation of NSCs towards astrocytic and neuronal lineages. Our findings suggest that plant-derived cellulose scaffolds have the potential to be used in neural tissue engineering and can be harnessed to direct the differentiation of NSCs.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioengineeringSame topicTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineFrench-language works237,207