Transmitter–Receptor Interactions between Growth Cones of Identified<i>Lymnaea</i>Neurons Determine Target Cell Selection<i>In Vitro</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In addition to their involvement in transsynaptic communication in the adult nervous system, neurotransmitters also participate in many developmental events, such as neurite initiation and outgrowth. Although growth cones can release transmitters and are themselves sensitive to exogenously applied neurotransmitters, a direct causal relationship between the release of transmitter from one growth cone and its effect on another has not yet been demonstrated. In this study, we provide evidence that dopamine release from the growth cones of an identified Lymnaea neuron, right pedal dorsal 1 (RPeD1), differentially regulates the growth cone behavior of its in vivo target and nontarget neurons in vitro. In coculture, RPeD1 growth cones enhanced the rate of growth cone advance from target cells and synaptic connections developed immediately after contact. In contrast, RPeD1 growth cones not only inhibited the rate of growth cone advance from nontarget cells but they also induced growth cone collapse. Using a "sniffer cell" approach, we demonstrated that both RPeD1 growth cones and somata released dopamine, which can be detected at a distance of several hundred micrometers. RPeD1 somata were used to demonstrate that spontaneous release of dopamine also acted as a chemoattractant for target growth cones but as a chemorepellent for nontarget growth cones. These effects were mimicked by exogenous dopamine application, and both RPeD1 growth cone and soma-induced effects were also blocked in the presence of dopamine receptor antagonists. This study emphasizes the importance of transmitter-receptor interactions between growth cones in target cell selection.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".