Expression of NMDA and oestrogen receptors by trigeminal ganglion neurons that innervate the rat temporalis muscle.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor (NR) or oestrogen receptor (OR) expression plays a role in the differences that temporalis muscle afferent fibres are less sensitive to peripheral receptor activation than masseter muscle afferent fibres and do not exhibit sex-related differences in NMDA-evoked discharge. METHODS: Immunohistochemical techniques were used to examine the expression of NR1, 2A, and 2B subunits of the NMDA receptor in male and female rats and the co-expression of NR2B subunits with ORs in female rats by trigeminal ganglion neurons that innervate the temporalis muscle. In vivo electrophysiological recording methods were employed to assess the response of afferent fibres to injection of NMDA into the temporalis muscle in female rats. RESULTS: Approximately 20% of temporalis ganglion neurons expressed NR1, NR2A and NR2B subunits, respectively, and there was no sex-related difference in the expression of these subunits. In female rats, both ORα and ORß receptors were identified in the trigeminal ganglion by Western blot. ORs were found on the majority (~80%) of temporalis ganglion neurons that expressed NR2B subunits. A significant positive correlation between blood oestrogen concentration and NMDA-evoked afferent discharge was identified. CONCLUSION: The absence of sex-related differences in NMDA receptor expression may account for the lack of sex-related differences in NMDA-evoked temporalis afferent discharge. The association of elevated oestrogen concentration with increased afferent response to NMDA and the co-expression of NRs and ORs in temporalis ganglion neurons suggest that sensory input from the temporalis muscle may be modulated by oestrogenic tone.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".