Effect of Focal Low‐frequency Stimulation on Amygdala‐kindled Afterdischarge Thresholds and Seizure Profiles in Fast‐ and Slow‐kindling Rat Strains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether low-frequency, 1-Hz sine-wave stimulation (LFS) applied to a fully kindled amygdala focus would show antiepileptic properties in rats that were either naturally seizure prone (Fast) or seizure resistant (Slow). METHODS: Normal twisted and/or "spanning" bipolar electrode configurations were implanted in the amygdalae of adult male Fast and Slow rats. In experiment one, rats were kindled daily to stage-5 levels through one electrode type until stable afterdischarge thresholds (ADTs) were obtained. Next, LFS was applied through the kindled electrode, and ADTs were redetermined 1 min later, and daily for a week, without reapplying the LFS. In experiment two, a single, normal bipolar kindling electrode was implanted in the amygdala and centered between two poles of a spanning electrode. After stable kindled ADTs were obtained, LFS was applied to the amygdala "area" through the spanning electrode. ADTs were redetermined at the kindled electrode as earlier. RESULTS: LFS through the kindling electrode had no effect on ADTs 1 min later, but the ADTs increased dramatically 24 h later and then slowly returned to baseline over days. In experiment two, LFS applied through the nonkindled spanning electrode also showed a small but significant threshold elevation at the interposing kindled electrode. Importantly, no obvious neuropathology was associated with these LFS treatments. CONCLUSIONS: LFS applied directly to the kindled network has significant threshold-elevating properties that are less evident when applied to the "general area"; here LFS must be delivered through a larger surface area and/or at higher intensity.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".