MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7071088380

Retinoic acid regulates Sox2 expression during neuronal and glial differentiation in mouse P19 cells

2012· other· en· W7071088380 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2012
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsP19 cellSOX2Retinoic acidNeurogenesisEmbryonic stem cellImmunocytochemistryTranscription factorCellular differentiationNeuroD
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Retinoic acid (RA) is a small lipophilic molecule that plays important roles in embryonic development by regulating cell proliferation, signaling and differentiation. There is compelling evidence that RA signaling controls the expression of a number of transcription factors in a spatio-temporal manner during these processes. In particular, Sox2, a transcription factor known for its involvement in stem cell fate commitment and neurogenesis may serve as a target of RA. In this study, we have used mouse embryonic carcinoma (EC) P19 cells to examine the effect of RA on Sox2 expression during neuronal and glial differentiation. Undifferentiated P19 cells express abundant levels of Sox2 during proliferation, a fact further supported by Sox2-DNA interaction throughout various stages of mitosis. In the presence of RA, P19 cells form embryonic bodies (EB) and differentiate into neurons and astrocytes in a chronological order similar to that of cell differentiation in the brain. RT-PCR, western blot and immunocytochemistry analyses show that the level of Sox2 is significantly reduced in P19 cells, as they differentiate into neurons, whereas P19 astrocytes maintain Sox2 expression. These results show that Sox2 is differentially expressed during neurogenesis and gliogenesis, suggesting its distinct functions throughout these processes.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0050.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.202 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCFrench-language works237,207