MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

30. Validation of a Novel Transgenic Mouse Model Expressing GFP in Motoneurons for the Investigation of Peripheral Nerve Injury

2025· article· en· W4409786516 on OpenAlexaff
Michela Fortner, Max Topley, Anne‐Marie Crotty, J. Michael Hendry

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery Global Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreen fluorescent proteinGenetically modified mousePeripheral nerveTransgenePeripheralPeripheral nerve injuryCell biologyNeuroscienceBiologyPathologyAnatomyChemistryMedicineGeneInternal medicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Peripheral nerve injury (PNI) is a significant clinical problem, and novel therapies are evidently necessary to optimize functional outcomes. However, the regenerative environment of motor fibers must first be thoroughly elucidated, an effort which is currently limited by inherent drawbacks of conventional visualization techniques. Mnx1 is a homeobox transcription factor that has been established as a spinal motoneuron-specific marker. Here, we propose a transgenic mouse model (Mnx-GFP) in which expression of a ZsGreen1 GFP is driven by the Mnx1 promoter for the specific investigation of motoneuron regeneration. This study aims to confirm an absence of off-target effects of recombination on nerve regeneration, fiber characteristics, and grip strength in male Mnx-GFP mice after median nerve injury. METHODS: 4-week old founder mice (males: heterozygous Mnx1-cre, females: homozygous Rosa expressing ZsGeen1 GFP) were obtained from the Jackson Laboratory and cross-bred in-house, followed by genotyping to confirm recombination. Male transgenic Mnx-GFP (n=2) and wildtype C57BL/6 (n=10) mice underwent surgical transection and immediate repair of the right median nerve. Every 3d following the intervention, unilateral volitional forelimb grip strength was assessed in all mice. On day 27, the median nerve was re-exposed and transected 4mm distal to the original repair site, at which point a 2mm distal segment was collected for histomorphometry. Fluorogold (FG) neurotracer was applied to the nerve stump to label regenerated neurons, followed by collection of DRG and spinal cord tissue 1 week later for immunofluorescent imaging and immunostaining for the neuronal marker Isl1. RESULTS: No significant differences in grip strength (g) were observed between Mnx-GFP and wildtype at baseline (122.7±11.74 vs. 122.8±6.72; p=0.99) or 4-weeks post-injury (31.83±4.41 vs. 39.29±1.45; p=0.071). Retrograde-labelling revealed that motor (274±36 vs. 169±20; p=0.057) and sensory (1160±104 vs. 1072±118; p=0.76) neuron counts were comparable between cohorts. Furthermore, the total pool of Mnx+ motoneurons in the cervical enlargement was observed to include neurons that successfully regenerated to the point of neurotracer application (FG+) as well as those that did not. Interestingly, a considerable number of non-brachial motoneurons were both GFP+ and Isl1+. Histomorphometry of the median nerve revealed no significant difference in myelin thickness (0.56±0.020μm vs. 0.51±0.014μm; p=0.19), axon diameter (1.89±0.040μm vs. 1.81±0.090μm; p=0.75), fiber diameter (3.025±0.025μm vs. 2.84±0.10μm; p=0.44), or g-ratio (0.64±0.025 vs. 0.64±0.012; p>0.99) at the 4-week timepoint. All values are presented as Mnx-GFP vs. C57BL/6. CONCLUSION: Currently, no transgenic models exist to specifically visualize motoneuron regeneration. This data demonstrates that the Mnx-GFP transgene had no measurable impact on regenerative capacity, fiber characteristics, or motor function, supporting this model as a valid tool to study PNI. The use of Mnx-GFP mice alongside more traditional analytical metrics thus has the potential to improve the efficiency and reproducibility of data collected in this field. Further, the Mnx+ motoneuron population was not limited to neurons that successfully regenerated to the site of retrograde-labelling, suggesting a potential utility of this model for assessing regenerative efficacy. Future investigations may aim to examine spinal motor column-specific markers to aid in identifying the cell population of interest within the larger motoneuron pool.

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)0.001
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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery Global OpenSame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207