MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6958313927 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22606691

Additional file 1 of Electric field stimulation boosts neuronal differentiation of neural stem cells for spinal cord injury treatment via PI3K/Akt/GSK-3β/β-catenin activation

2023· article· en· W6958313927 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSociopolitical Dynamics in Russia
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStimulationPopulationNeural stem cellSpinal cord injurySpinal cordAxonCellOvershoot (microwave communication)Electric field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Additional file 1: Table S1. Proportions and percentages of Q33n1 hiPSC-derived NPCs which demonstrated each of the different types of induced action potentials for electric field (EF) stimulated and non-stimulated control (NoEF) at weeks 1-3. None = no significant voltage excursions from baseline; Attempting Single = voltage excursions which do not overshoot 0 mV; Single = one excursion only, which overshoots 0 mV; Attempting Train = several excursions, but only one which overshoots 0 mV; Train = several excursions, with more than one which overshoots 0 mV. Table S2. Analysis of passive and active parameters of induced action potentials of Q33n1 hiPSC-derived NPSs stimulated with an electric field (EF) and nonstimulated (NoEF) at weeks 1-3. * P < 0.05, *** P < 0.001. *-*** were considered as significantly different from correspondent values of NoEF Q33n1 hiPSC-derived groups of NPSs. Abbreviations: Membrane potential (Vm), input resistance (Rin), whole cell capacitance (Cp), I Namax and I Kmax are Na+ and K+ currents, respectively. n: cell number. Figure S1. Safety of EF stimulation on NSCs. A. The MTT assay demonstrated lower absorbance with EF stimulation on NSCs for 4 to 7 days. * P < 0.05 was considered as significantly different between EF and NoEF groups. B. The morphology observation displayed healthy and active status of both NSCs with and without EF stimulation. But the smaller cell population and longer axon process were detected in the EF stimulated group. Scale bar: 20 µm. Figure S2. EF promoted neuronal differentiation of hiPSC-derived NPCs. A-B. The EF stimulation for 14 days in vitro induced synaptophysin and βIII-tubulin up-regulation in hiPSC-derived NPCs. Scale bar: 20 µm. C. Pie charts displaying percentage and proportion of Q33n1 hiPSC-derived neurons, EF stimulated (upper panel) and noEF (lower panel), cultured in vitro for 1-3 weeks exhibiting: no activity - Quiet (red), Attempting activity - (amber) or Spontaneous activity (green). D. Exemplar traces of membrane potential of Q33n1 hiPSC-derived neurons which demonstrates each different type of activity (Quiet, Attempting and Spontaneous). E. Mean ± S.E.M. values of membrane potential of EF stimulated (filled squares) and noEF (empty circles) Q33n1 hiPSC-dervied neurons at weeks 1-3 of culturing in vitro. The synaptophysin+ and βIII-tubulin+ positive cell count and percentage data were presented as mean ± SD. * P < 0.05 and ** P < 0.01 were considered as significantly different between EF and NoEF groups. Figure S3. Effect of EF treatment on voltage-gated Na+ current activation and inactivation characteristics during hiPSC differentiation (A). Exemplar family of whole cell currents (upper) during the activation/inactivation voltage protocol (lower). Inset (right) illustrate Na+ currents. Peak Na+ current activation and inactivation levels are shown by the red and blue arrows, respectively. (B-G). Mean activation and inactivation curves of whole-cell Na+ currents recorded in EF treated Q33n1-hiPSC derived neuronscultured in vitro at weeks 1 -3 (B, D, F) and noEF control (C, E, G). Activation curves are depicted by the filled squares and inactivation curves are shown by the empty circles. On each panel individual Vm values (filled upward triangles) and mean Vm values (red arrow on abscissa) are also shown. Voltages of half maximal action (Va50) and half maximal inactivation (Vi50) are also indicated in each panel, along with h factors, mean crossing points (downward arrows) and number of cells (n) recorded. Figure S4. The differentiating potential of PI3Kγ -/-and PI3KγKD/KD NSCs. The PI3Kγ -/-and PI3KγKD/KD NSCs were plated on slides for monolayer culture, differentiation induction and immunofluorescence. For the differentiation induction, 0.1% FBS was added to the culture medium for 7 days. A. MAP2 and GFAP positive cells in the PI3Kγ -/-and PI3KγKD/KD NSCs with 7-day differentiation induction. B. Cellcount ratio of MAP2+ cells from the induced PI3Kγ -/-and PI3KγKD/KD NSCs. C. Cellcount ratio of GFAP+ cells from the induced PI3Kγ -/-and PI3KγKD/KD NSCs. Scale bar: 20 µm. * P < 0.05 was considered as significantly different between EF and NoEF groups.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0780.000

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 head0.375
Teacher spread0.308 · 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.

Study designOther design
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicSociopolitical Dynamics in RussiaFrench-language works237,207