MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399471726 · doi:10.1002/glia.24578

The laminar position, morphology, and gene expression profiles of cortical astrocytes are influenced by time of birth from ventricular/subventricular progenitors

2024· article· en· W4399471726 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniela Lozano Casasbuenas, Ines Kortebi, Charles Gora, E. Scott, Celeste Gomes, Markley Silva Oliveira, Tanvi Sharma, E Daniele, Arman Olfat, Rachel Gibbs, Scott A. Yuzwa, Emily Gilbert, Patrick Küry, Aaron R. Wheeler, Martin Lévesque, Maryam Faiz

Bibliographic record

VenueGlia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds de recherche du QuébecConnaught FundCanada Research ChairsJürgen Manchot StiftungCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGenome Canada
KeywordsBiologySubventricular zoneProgenitor cellAstrocyteElectroporationCell biologyOlfactory bulbNeocortexNeural stem cellEmbryonic stem cellNeurogliaNeuroscienceCentral nervous systemStem cellGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Astrocytes that reside in superficial (SL) and deep cortical layers have distinct molecular profiles and morphologies, which may underlie specific functions. Here, we demonstrate that the production of SL and deep layer (DL) astrocyte populations from neural progenitor cells in the mouse is temporally regulated. Lineage tracking following in utero and postnatal electroporation with PiggyBac (PB) EGFP and birth dating with EdU and FlashTag, showed that apical progenitors produce astrocytes during late embryogenesis (E16.5) that are biased to the SL, while postnatally labeled (P0) astrocytes are biased to the DL. In contrast, astrocytes born during the predominantly neurogenic window (E14.5) showed a random distribution in the SL and DL. Of interest, E13.5 astrocytes birth dated at E13.5 with EdU showed a lower layer bias, while FT labeling of apical progenitors showed no bias. Finally, examination of the morphologies of "biased" E16.5- and P0-labeled astrocytes demonstrated that E16.5-labeled astrocytes exhibit different morphologies in different layers, while P0-labeled astrocytes do not. Differences based on time of birth are also observed in the molecular profiles of E16.5 versus P0-labeled astrocytes. Altogether, these results suggest that the morphological, molecular, and positional diversity of cortical astrocytes is related to their time of birth from ventricular/subventricular zone progenitors.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGliaSame topicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsFrench-language works237,207