MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1834174605 · doi:10.1152/jn.2001.86.1.321

Chemical Induction of mGluR5- and Protein Synthesis–Dependent Long-Term Depression in Hippocampal Area CA1

2001· article· en· W1834174605 on OpenAlexaff
Kimberly M. Huber, John Roder, Mark F. Bear

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLong-term depressionMetabotropic glutamate receptorSynaptic plasticityNeuroscienceMetabotropic glutamate receptor 5Synaptic fatigueChemistryNMDA receptorMetabotropic receptorSynaptic augmentationGlutamate receptorStimulationAgonistReceptorBiologyBiochemistryAMPA receptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent work has demonstrated that specific patterns of synaptic stimulation can induce long-term depression (LTD) in area CA1 that depends on activation of metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs) and rapid protein synthesis. Here we show that the same form of synaptic modification can be induced by brief application of the selective mGluR agonist (RS)-3,5-dihydroxyphenylglycine (DHPG). DHPG-LTD 1) is a saturable form of synaptic plasticity, 2) requires mGluR5, 3) is mechanistically distinct from N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR)--dependent LTD, and 4) shares a common expression mechanism with protein synthesis-dependent LTD evoked using synaptic stimulation. DHPG-LTD should be useful for biochemical analysis of mGluR5- and protein synthesis-dependent synaptic modification.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations385
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207