Patterns of connexin36 and eGFP reporter expression among motoneurons in spinal sexually dimorphic motor nuclei in mouse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Sexually dimorphic spinal motoneurons (MNs) in the dorsomedial nucleus (DMN) and dorsolateral nucleus (DLN) as well as those in the cremaster nucleus are involved in reproductive behaviours, and the cremaster nucleus additionally contributes to testicular thermoregulation.It has been reported that MNs in DMN and DLN are extensively linked by gap junctions forming electrical synapses composed of connexin36 (Cx36) and there is evidence that subpopulation of MNs in the cremaster nucleus are also electrically coupled by these synapses.Methodology: We used immunofluorescence methods to detect enhanced green fluorescent protein (eGFP) reporter for Cx36 expression in these motor nuclei.Results: We document in male mice that about half the MNs in each of DMN and DLN express eGFP, while the remaining half do not.Further, we found that the eGFP + vs. eGFP -subsets of MNs in each of these motor nuclei innervate different target muscles; eGFP + MNs in DMN and DLN project to sexually dimorphic bulbocavernosus and ischiocavernosus muscles, while the eGFP -subsets project to sexually nondimorphic anal and external urethral sphincter muscles.Similarly, eGFP + vs. eGFP -cremaster MNs were found to project to anatomically distinct portions of the cremaster muscle.By immunofluorescence, nearly all motoneurons in both DMN and DLN displayed punctate labelling for Cx36, including at eGFP + /eGFP + , eGFP + /eGFP -and eGFP -/ eGFP -cell appositions.Conclusions: Most if not all motoneurons in DMN and DLN are electrically coupled, including sexually dimorphic and non-dimorphic motoneurons with each other, despite absence of eGFP reporter in the non-dimorphic populations in these nuclei that have selective projections to sexually non-dimorphic target muscles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".