Effects of exercise on NMDA receptor subunit contributions to bidirectional synaptic plasticity in the mouse dentate gyrus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined synaptic plasticity in the dentate gyrus (DG) of the hippocampus in vitro in juvenile C57Bl6 mice (28-40 days of age), housed in control conditions with minimal enrichment (Controls) or with access to an exercise wheel (Runners). LTP expression was significantly greater in slices from Runners than in those from Controls, but could be blocked by APV in both groups. LTP was significantly reduced by NR2B subunit antagonists in both groups. NVP-AAM077, an antagonist with a higher preference for NR2A subunits over NR2B subunits, blocked LTP in slices from Runners and produced a slight depression in Control animals. LTD in the DG was also blocked by APV, but not by either of the NR2B specific antagonists. Strikingly, NVP-AAM077 prevented LTD in Runners, but not in Control animals, suggesting an increased involvement of NR2A subunits in LTD in animals that exercise. NVP-AAM077 did not block LTD in NR2A Knock Out (KO) animals that exercised, as expected. In an attempt to discern whether NMDA receptors located at extrasynaptic sites could play a role in the induction of LTD, DL-TBOA was used to block excitatory amino acid transport and increase extracellular glutamate levels. Under these conditions, LTD was not blocked by the co-application of a specific NR2B subunit antagonist in either group, but NVP-AAM077 again blocked LTD selectively in Runners. These results indicate that NR2A and NR2B subunits play a significant role in LTP in the DG, and that exercise can significantly alter the contribution of NMDA NR2A subunits to LTD.
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".