Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 270

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparative analysis of lesion development and intraspinal inflammation in four strains of mice following spinal contusion injury

Open access
Kigerl, Kristina A., McGaughy, Violeta M., Popovich, Phillip G.·2006·Journal of Comparative Neurology

Abstract

Susceptibility to neuroinflammatory disease is influenced in part by genetics. Recent data indicate that survival of traumatized neurons is strain dependent and influenced by polygenic loci that control resistance/susceptibility to experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), a model of CNS autoimmune disease. Here, we describe patterns of neurodegeneration and intraparenchymal inflammation after traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) in mice known to exhibit varying degrees of EAE susceptibility [EAE‐resistant (r) or EAE‐susceptible (s) mice]. Spinal cords from C57BL/6 (EAE‐s), C57BL/10 (EAE‐r), BALB/c (EAE‐r), and B10.PL (EAE‐s) mice were prepared for stereological and immunohistochemical analysis at 6 hours or 3, 7, 14, 28, or 42 days following midthoracic (T9) spinal contusion injury. In general, genetic predisposition to EAE predicted the magnitude of intraparenchymal inflammation but not lesion size/length or locomotor recovery. Specifically, microglia/macrophage activation, recruitment of neutrophils and lymphocytes, and de novo synthesis of MHC class II were greatest in C57BL/6 mice and least in BALB/c mice at all times examined. However, lesion volume and axial spread of neurodegeneration were similar in C57BL/6 and BALB/c mice and were significantly greater than in C57BL/10 or B10.PL mice. Strains with marked intraspinal inflammation also developed the most intense lesion fibrosis. Thus, strain‐dependent neuroinflammation was observed after SCI, but without a consistent relationship to EAE susceptibility or lesion progression. Only in C57BL/6 mice was the magnitude of intraspinal inflammation predictive of secondary neurodegeneration, functional recovery, or fibrosis. J. Comp. Neurol. 494:578–594, 2006. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cne.20827

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 80 references

Cited by

See all 270

Metadata

Authors
Kigerl, K. A., McGaughy, V. M., & Popovich, P. G.
Venue
Journal of Comparative Neurology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-12-22
Volume
494
Issue
4
Pages
578-594
ISSN
  • 0021-9967 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-9861
OpenAlex
W2002869490
Cited by
270
References
80
FWCI
8.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparative analysis of lesion development and intraspinal inflammation in four strains of mice following spinal contusion injury. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cne.20827
The paper
Kigerl, K. A., McGaughy, V. M., & Popovich, P. G. (2006). Comparative analysis of lesion development and intraspinal inflammation in four strains of mice following spinal contusion injury. Journal of Comparative Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.20827

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.