ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2014
Comprehensive analysis of neonatal versus adult unilateral decortication in a mouse model using behavioral, neuroanatomical, and DNA microarray approaches.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of common housekeeping genes as reference for gene expression studies using RT-qPCR in mouse choroid plexus.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- DNA microarray-based experimental strategy for trustworthy expression profiling of the hippocampal genes by astaxanthin supplementation in adult mouse.Genomics data · 2016Article
- Two-color Dye-swap DNA Microarray approach toward confident gene expression profiling in PMCAO mouse model for ischemia-related and PACAP38-influenced genes.Genomics data · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previously, studying the development, especially of corticospinal neurons, it was concluded that the main compensatory mechanism after unilateral brain injury in rat at the neonatal stage was due in part to non-lesioned ipsilateral corticospinal neurons that escaped selection by axonal elimination or neuronal apoptosis. However, previous results suggesting compensatory mechanism in neonate brain were not correlated with high functional recovery. Therefore, what is the difference among neonate and adult in the context of functional recovery and potential mechanism(s) therein? Here, we utilized a brain unilateral decortication mouse model and compared motor functional recovery mechanism post-neonatal brain hemisuction (NBH) with adult brain hemisuction (ABH). Three analyses were performed: (1) Quantitative behavioral analysis of forelimb movements using ladder walking test; (2) neuroanatomical retrograde tracing analysis of unlesioned side corticospinal neurons; and (3) differential global gene expressions profiling in unlesioned-side neocortex (rostral from bregma) in NBH and ABH on a 8 × 60 K mouse whole genome Agilent DNA chip. Behavioral data confirmed higher recovery ability in NBH over ABH is related to non-lesional frontal neocortex including rostral caudal forelimb area. A first inventory of differentially expressed genes genome-wide in the NBH and ABH mouse model is provided as a resource for the scientific community.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.