MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6894279470 · doi:10.5683/sp3/2z52ei

Nitrative stress impairs pro nerve growth factor transport in basal forebrain cholinergic neurons via c-Jun N-terminal kinase activation

2024· dataset· en· W6894279470 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueBorealis · 2024
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeroxynitriteNerve growth factorAxoplasmic transportBasal forebrainKinasePhosphorylationCholinergicIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, rat BFCNs were cultured in microfluidic chambers, and axonal transport of quantum dot labelled proNGF was analysed via fluorescence microscopy. BFCNs were treated with SIN-1, a peroxynitrite generator, CC401, a JNK inhibitor, or L-NAME, a nitric oxide synthase inhibitor, prior to analysis of axonal transport. JNK activity was quantified via immunocytochemistry. In vitro aging decreased retrograde transport of proNGF. Age-induced proNGF transport deficits were rescued by L-NAME and CC401. L-NAME reduced levels of activated JNK in aged BFCNs, SIN-1 increased JNK activation in young BFCNs, and SIN-1-induced proNGF transport deficits were rescued by CC401. These results indicate that nitrative stress impairs proNGF transport by activating JNK. Interestingly, SIN-1 and L-NAME increased and decreased JNK activation, respectively, in p75NTR exon III knockout BFCNs, indicating that nitrative stress-induced JNK activation occurs independently of p75NTR. Our findings identify mechanisms contributing to loss of proNGF transport in aged BFCNs, which may help to rescue BFCN function and cognition in aging.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.006

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBorealis→French-language works237,207→