MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1601226735 · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2006.120550

Synaptic modifications at the CA3–CA1 synapse after chronic AMPA receptor blockade in rat hippocampal slices

2007· article· en· W1601226735 on OpenAlexaff
José Marı́a Mateos, Andreas Lüthi, Nataša Savić, B. Stierli, P. Streit, Beat H. Gähwiler, R. Anne McKinney

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAMPA receptorDendritic spineNeuroscienceSilent synapseGlutamatergicSynapsePostsynaptic potentialHippocampal formationDendritic filopodiaLong-term potentiationSynaptic plasticityPostsynaptic densityChemistryBiologyExcitatory postsynaptic potentialGlutamate receptorReceptorInhibitory postsynaptic potential

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maintenance of dendritic spines, the postsynaptic elements of most glutamatergic synapses in the central nervous system, requires continued activation of AMPA receptors. In organotypic hippocampal slice cultures, chronic blockade of AMPA receptors for 14 days induces a substantial loss of dendritic spines on CA1 pyramidal neurons. Here, using serial section electron microscopy, we show that loss of dendritic spines is paralleled by a significant reduction in synapse density. In contrast, we observed an increased number of asymmetric synapses onto the dendritic shaft, suggesting that spine retraction does not inevitably lead to synapse elimination. Functional analysis of the remaining synapses revealed that hippocampal circuitry compensates for the anatomical loss of synapses by increasing synaptic efficacy. Moreover, we found that the observed morphological and functional changes were associated with altered bidirectional synaptic plasticity. We conclude that continued activation of AMPA receptors is necessary for maintaining structure and function of central glutamatergic synapses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations52
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207