Susceptibility of brainstem to kindling and transfer to the forebrain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The kindling of seizures with stimulation of brainstem sites has been reported inconsistently in the literature. The characteristics of the kindling observed, involving high intensities of stimulation and immediate onset of generalized tonic-clonic convulsions, raise questions regarding the nature of kindling from these sites. METHODS: We implanted chronic electrodes in either the nucleus reticularis pontis oralis (RPO), mesencephalic reticular formation (MRF), dorsal periaqueductal gray (dPAG), or ventrolateral periaqueductal gray (vlPAG) in male Long-Evans rats, with a recording electrode in the amygdala. Rats received conventional high-frequency kindling stimulation once daily for 30 days. To test for transfer, we kindled the amygdala beginning 7 weeks after the last brainstem kindling trial. RESULTS: Tonic-clonic seizures were evoked by stimulation from all brainstem sites. Seizures were brief and were associated with characteristic low-amplitude high-frequency afterdischarge (AD). Kindling of the dPAG resulted in the development of classic AD and increased AD duration. Prior kindling of the dPAG facilitated subsequent kindling of the amygdala; however, no transfer was observed with prekindling of other brainstem sites. DISCUSSION: The variability in the response to kindling stimulation suggests that certain brainstem sites are resistant to kindling, whereas other sites are more susceptible to kindling but are still relatively resistant in comparison to sites in the forebrain. The development of classic AD in later trials of dPAG stimulation suggests that epileptogenesis can occur even in the initial absence of classic AD when low-amplitude high-frequency AD is present.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".