MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970142290 · doi:10.1159/000117966

SL76002 – Effect on Gamma-Aminobutyric Acid and Dopamine in Animals Treated Chronically with Haloperidol

2008· article· en· W1970142290 on OpenAlexaff
Shiva K. Rastogi, R.B. Rastogi, Radhey L. Singhal, Y.D. Lapierre

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropsychobiology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversity of Ottawa
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsHaloperidolDopaminegamma-Aminobutyric acidPharmacologyAminobutyric acidPsychologyDopamine antagonistNeurotransmitterHomovanillic acidNeuroscienceMedicineInternal medicineCentral nervous systemSerotoninReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Daily haloperidol injection at the dose of 5 mg/kg for 34 days did not change the levels of dopamine in the corpus striatum, frontal cortex, and midbrain of rats. However, the gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) level was increased by 27% in the corpus striatum. Haloperidol withdrawal for 4 days after 30-day treatment increased GABA levels of the corpus striatum and the frontal cortex to 140 and 125%, respectively, of control values. GABA, by its inhibitory actions, depleted dopamine level in the corpus striatum and frontal cortex by 17 and 29%, respectively. Administration of SL76002, a new GABA agonist, for 4 days at the dose of 400 mg/kg i.p. to haloperidol-withdrawn rats increased GABA levels in striatum by 23% of control values. The dopamine levels were also decreased significantly in the frontal cortex and corpus striatum. Our data demonstrate that SL76002, by altering the GABA levels, probably influences DA functioning in the corpus striatum, a region responsible for involuntary movements.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.277 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuropsychobiologySame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207