MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410440690 · doi:10.1002/dvdy.70035

The endocannabinoid system regulates both ependymoglial and neuronal cell responses to a tail amputation in the axolotl

2025· article· en· W4410440690 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael Tolentino, Sarah E. Walker, Gaynor E. Spencer, Robert L. Carlone

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Dynamics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEndocannabinoid systemRegeneration (biology)AxolotlCannabinoid receptorBiologySpinal cordDownregulation and upregulationNeuroscienceAM251Cell biologyAnandamideReceptorAnatomyAgonist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.661
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental DynamicsSame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207