Norepinephrine depletion facilitates recovery of function after focal ischemia in the rat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have suggested that increased norepinephrine plays an important role in recovery of function after brain injury; however, the majority of these studies used drugs that are known to also affect other monoamines to increase or decrease norepinephrine. The purpose of the present study was to determine if norepinephrine is required to promote recovery after ischemia. A form of enriched rehabilitation was used to rehabilitate animals after ischemia and the neurotoxin N-(2-chloroethyl)-N-ethyl-2-bromobenzylamine was used to selectively destroy norepinephrine projections from the locus coeruleus. Three sensorimotor tests were used to evaluate the recovery of the animals. Depletion of norepinephrine improved sensorimotor recovery in standard-housed animals and did not impede recovery in the rehabilitation groups. Dopamine beta hydroxylase staining was used to confirm N-(2-chloroethyl)-N-ethyl-2-bromobenzylamine-depleted terminal norepinephrine levels. The amount of norepinephrine terminal staining negatively correlated with recovery of function in the staircase test after ischemia. In addition, enriched rehabilitation increased, but depletion of norepinephrine had no effect on, brain-derived neurotrophic factor protein levels, which have also been linked to improved recovery of function. Together the above findings question the previously postulated role of norepinephrine in recovery of function after stroke.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".