Extrafocal threshold reductions in amygdala‐kindled rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Racine's classic study suggested that after discharge thresholds were reduced in the primary stimulation site (amygdala) of kindled rats, but that that they were not reduced in secondary (nonstimulated) sites. However, recent reports of neurochemical changes related to excitation and inhibition in nonstimulated sites in kindled brains would be expected to cause reductions in afterdischarge thresholds in these sites. More recently Sanei et al. have reported a significant threshold reduction in the piriform cortex of amygdala- and hippocampus-kindled cats, but not in the entorhinal cortex. The present study was designed to determine whether the results of Sanei et al. in cats could be replicated in rats kindled in the amygdala-a model commonly used in studies of seizure mechanisms and anticonvulsant drug development. METHODS: Adult, male Long-Evans rats were kindled in the amygdala or given matched handling. Beginning 48 h following the last stimulation, afterdischarge thresholds were determined in the ipsilateral piriform and entorhinal cortices. Amygdala thresholds were determined 24 h later. RESULTS: Afterdischarge thresholds were significantly reduced in both the amygdala and the ipsilateral entorhinal cortex of amygdala-kindled rats. Afterdischarge thresholds in the piriform cortex did not differ significantly between kindled and control subjects. DISCUSSION: These data suggest that threshold reduction occurs outside the primary kindling site in rats as well as in cats. Extrafocal changes in afterdischarge threshold may be functionally important, and might possibly relate to extrafocal neurochemical changes and progressive generalization of seizure discharge from discrete focal sites.
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) | 0.002 | 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".