Cited by 443

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Induction of Alzheimer-like β-Amyloid Immunoreactivity in the Brains of Rabbits with Dietary Cholesterol

Sparks, D.Larry, Scheff, Stephen W., Hunsaker, John C., Liu, Huiachen, Landers, Teresa, Gross, David R.·1994·Experimental Neurology

Abstract

beta-amyloid and ALZ-50 immunocytochemical reactivity were determined in the brains of rabbits fed either a control or 2% cholesterol diet. Control rabbits demonstrated no accumulation of intracellular immunolabeled beta-amyloid within 3 min after death. In animals fed the experimental diet for 4, 6, and 8 weeks (postmortem interval < 3 min), there was an increasingly mild-to-moderate-to-severe accumulation of intracellular immunolabeled beta-amyloid. Whether or not beta-amyloid is causally linked to processes leading to dementia, it is related in some way to the prime cause of human death; heart disease. Hypercholesterolemic rabbits may provide an animal model to study altered beta-APP metabolism leading to Alzheimer-like beta-amyloid accumulation xe03and extracellular deposition in brain.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/exnr.1994.1044

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Sparks, D. L., Scheff, S. W., Hunsaker, J. C., Liu, H., Landers, T., & Gross, D. R.
Venue
Experimental Neurology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1994-03
Volume
126
Issue
1
Pages
88-94
ISSN
0014-4886
Cited by
443
References
0
Language
en

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