MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409461620 · doi:10.1186/s13064-025-00197-7

Mechanistic logic and timing of retinal bipolar cell class and type specification

2025· article· en· W4409461620 on OpenAlexafffund
Alberto Ruiz de Chavez Ginzo, Robert L. Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscover Neuroscience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsClass (philosophy)RetinalType (biology)Computer scienceMedicineBiologyArtificial intelligenceOphthalmologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Underlying the five neuronal cell classes that comprise the mammalian retina is a tremendous amount of cell type diversity. Within the bipolar cell class of retinal interneurons, which mediate visual signalling from photoreceptor cells to amacrine and ganglion cells, at least 15 distinct types have been classified based on gene expression and morphology. How bipolar cell types are specified and to what extent intrinsic and extrinsic factors are involved in this process is poorly understood. To address these issues, we developed an in vitro strategy using retinal cell dissociation and metabolic cell cycle labelling to track the progression of retinal progenitor cells and determine the timing and requirement of cell–cell interactions during bipolar cell class/type specification. Consistent with the idea that bipolar cell development unfolds in a stepwise manner, the expression of Tg.BC-Vsx2:CRE, a marker for bipolar cell class specification, appeared about 36 h after the last retinal progenitor cell S-phase and preceded the expression of type-specific markers, VSX1, PKCα, Tg.mGluR6:βgal, which appeared 12–24 h later. Tg.BC-Vsx2:CRE-expressing bipolar cells were generated, albeit at reduced levels, when postmitotic retinal progenitor cells were plated ~ 24 h after their last S-phase and cultured with little to no cell–cell contact, however, none of these bipolar cells exhibited type-specific marker expression. In contrast, cells cultured in the same manner but with abundant cell–cell contact, or cells dissociated ~ 48 after their last S-phase and cultured with little to no cell–cell contact, gave rise to bipolar cells expressing type-specific markers. The requirement for cell–cell contact was not indiscriminate, as co-culturing with non-retinal HEK293T cells did not rescue the appearance of bipolar cell-type specific marker expression. Together, these results support a stepwise model for bipolar cell development in which intrinsic and extrinsic factors specify bipolar cells as a class through the formation of a pan-bipolar cell intermediate precursor within the first 36 h following retinal progenitor cell cycle exit. Bipolar cell type specification appears dissociable from class specification and requires extrinsic factors within the first 48 h after progenitor cell cycle exit.

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscover NeuroscienceSame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207