Central Sensitization of Nociceptive Neurons in Trigeminal Subnucleus Oralis Depends on Integrity of Subnucleus Caudalis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our recent studies have shown that application to the tooth pulp of the inflammatory irritant mustard oil (MO) produces a prolonged (>40 min) "central sensitization" reflected in neuroplastic changes in the mechanoreceptive field (RF) and response properties of nociceptive brain stem neurons in subnuclei oralis (Vo) and caudalis (Vc) of the trigeminal spinal tract nucleus. In view of the previously demonstrated ascending modulatory influence of Vc on Vo, our aim was to determine whether the Vo neuroplastic changes induced by MO application to the tooth pulp depend on an ascending influence from Vc. In chloralose/urethan-anesthetized rats, MO application to the pulp produced significant increases in Vo nociceptive neuronal orofacial RF size and responses to mechanical noxious stimuli that lasted as long as 40-60 min. These changes were not affected by vehicle (saline) microinjected into Vc at 20 min after MO application, but 0.3 microl of a 5 mM CoCl(2) solution microinjected into the ipsilateral Vc produced a reversible blockade of the MO-induced Vo neuroplastic changes. A similar volume and concentration of CoCl(2) solution injected into subnucleus interpolaris of the trigeminal spinal tract nucleus did not affect the MO-induced neuroplastic changes in Vo. These findings indicate that inflammatory pulp-induced central sensitization in Vo is dependent on the functional integrity of Vc.
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".