MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1958493192 · doi:10.1242/jeb.203.20.3189

K + Currents in Cultured Neurones From a Polyclad Flatworm

2000· article· en· W1958493192 on OpenAlexaff
Steven D. Buckingham, Andrew N. Spencer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsBamfield Marine Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlatwormBiologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cells from the brain of the polyclad flatworm Notoplana atomata were dispersed and maintained in primary culture for up to 3 weeks. Whole-cell patch-clamp of presumed neurones revealed outwardly directed K(+) currents that comprised, in varying proportions, a rapidly activating (time constant tau =0.94+/-0.79 ms; N=15) and inactivating ( tau =26.1+/-1.9 ms; N=22) current and a second current that also activated rapidly ( tau =1.1+/-0.2 ms; N=9) (means +/- s.e.m.) but did not inactivate within 100 ms. Both current types activated over similar voltage ranges. Activation and steady-state inactivation overlap and are markedly rightward-shifted compared with most Shaker-like currents (half-activation of 16.9+/-1. 9 mV, N=7, half-inactivation of -35.4+/-3.0 mV, N=5). Recovery from inactivation was rapid (50+/-2.5 ms at -90 mV). Both currents were unaffected by tetraethylammonium (25 mmol l(-1)), whereas 4-aminopyridine (10 mmol l(-1)) selectively blocked the inactivating current. The rapidly inactivating current, like cloned K(+) channels from cnidarians and certain cloned K(+) channels from molluscs and the Kv3 family of vertebrate channels, differed from most A-type K(+) currents reported to date. These findings suggest that K(+) currents in Notoplana atomata play novel roles in shaping excitability properties.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.384

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BiologySame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207