Laminar differences in field potential morphology and long‐term potentiation in motor cortex coronal slices from both unstimulated and previously potentiated rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have reported that long-term potentiation (LTP) can be reliably induced in motor cortex of adult, freely moving rats by the application of spaced and repeated high frequency stimulating trains to the white matter. In the present study, we monitored field potentials (FPs) and LTP in both layer II/III and V in coronal slices of motor cortex taken from implanted control and previously potentiated Long-Evans rats. The baseline FP amplitudes were decreased in layer II/III, and the amplitude of small spikes was significantly increased in layer V in slices from previously potentiated rats compared to unpotentiated control rats. In response to high frequency stimulation applied to the slice itself, both implanted control and previously potentiated rats showed similar levels of LTP in layer II/III. LTP could not be induced in layer V. These results show that layer II/III and V respond differently to high frequency stimulation in vitro. In addition, layer II/III responds very differently in slice compared to chronic preparations.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".