Glucose Concentrations Influence Subfornical Organ Neuron Responsiveness to Cholecystokinin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cholecystokinin (CCK) is a peptide hormone released into the bloodstream by the small intestine in response to meal consumption. Although much is known about CCK's role in digestion, its effect on the central nervous system and role as a hunger suppressant are less well understood. Our lab has previously shown that circulating CCK is sensed by the subfornical organ (SFO), a circumventricular organ lacking a blood‐brain barrier, and may influence central autonomic control via activation of CCK 2 receptors (Ahmed et al. , 2014). The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of glucose concentration on the excitability of SFO neurons in response to CCK. SFO neurons from Sprague Dawley rats (125‐200g) were micro dissected, dissociated, and incubated at three different glucose concentrations (1mM, 5mM, and 10mM). Then, using whole‐cell and perforated patch current clamp recording techniques, the effects of bath application of CCK (10nM and 0.1nM) on membrane potential at these glucose concentrations (1mM, 5mM, and 10mM) were assessed. We found that at 1mM glucose, the majority of responding cells hyperpolarized (39% hyperpolarized [mean membrane potential (MMP): ‐14.8 ± 2.1 mV], n=13; vs. 18% depolarized [MMP: 6.4 ± 1.9 mV], n=6) in response to 0.1 nM CCK. In contrast at 5mM and 10mM glucose, CCK depolarized the majority of responding cells (53% and 40% depolarized [MMP: 10.3 ± 1.0 mV and 12.1 ± 2.7 mV], n=10 and n=10; vs. 21% and 24% hyperpolarized [MMP: ‐14.7 ± 3.9 mV and ‐11.6 ± 2.8 mV], n= 4 and n=6). This study suggests that circulating levels of glucose may affect central autonomic integration in the subfornical organ. Supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".