MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1586109897 · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2008.166314

Specific role of dopamine D1 receptors in spinal network activation and rhythmic movement induction in vertebrates

2009· article· en· W1586109897 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicolas Lapointe, Pascal Rouleau, Roth‐Visal Ung, Pierre A. Guertin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicZebrafish Biomedical Research Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchShandong Academy of Sciences
KeywordsAgonistReceptorNeuroscienceBiologyDopamineHindlimbCentral pattern generatorRhythmDopamine receptor D1Dopamine receptorSpinal cordInternal medicineEndocrinologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dopamine (DA) is well-recognized for its determinant role in the modulation of various brain functions. DA was also found in in vitro isolated invertebrate preparations to activate per se the central pattern generator for locomotion. However, it is less clear whether such a role as an activator of central neural circuitries exists in vertebrate species. Here, we studied in vivo the effects induced by selective DA receptor agonists and antagonists on hindlimb movement generation in mice completely spinal cord-transected (Tx) at the low-thoracic level (Th9/10). Administration of D1/D5 receptor agonists (0.5-2.5 mg kg(-1), i.p.) was found to acutely elicit rhythmic locomotor-like movements (LMs) and non-locomotor movements (NLMs) in untrained and non-sensory stimulated animals. Comparable effects were found in mice lacking the D5 receptor (D5KO) whereas D1/D5 receptor antagonist-pretreated animals (wild-type or D5KO) failed to display D1/D5 agonist-induced LMs. In contrast, administration of broad spectrum or selective D2, D3 or D4 agonists consistently failed to elicit significant hindlimb movements. Overall, the results clearly show in mice the existence of a role for D1 receptors in spinal network activation and corresponding rhythmic movement generation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations47
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicZebrafish Biomedical Research ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207