The endocannabinoid system regulates both ependymoglial and neuronal cell responses to a tail amputation in the axolotl
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The endocannabinoid system is a neuromodulatory system implicated in cellular processes during both development and regeneration. The Mexican axolotl, one of only a few vertebrates capable of central nervous system regeneration, was used to examine the role of the endocannabinoid system in the regeneration of the tail and spinal cord following amputation. RESULTS: The endocannabinoid receptor CB1 was upregulated in the regenerating axolotl spinal cord by 4 hours following tail amputation, and this upregulation persisted for at least 14 days. The endocannabinoid receptor CB2 was upregulated later, between 7 and 14 days after tail amputation. Both CB1 and CB2 were located in ependymoglia and neurons within the regenerating spinal cord. Treatment with inverse agonists to inhibit CB1 (AM251) or CB2 (AM630) inhibited spinal cord and tail regeneration. During the first 7 days after injury, CB1 and CB2 expression was also necessary for the proliferation of ependymoglial cells and the regeneration of axons into the newly regenerated tail tissue. However, only CB1 was necessary for the differentiation of ependymoglia into immature neurons. CONCLUSIONS: These studies are the first to examine the role of the endocannabinoid system during spinal cord regeneration in a regeneration-competent vertebrate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".