MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

NMDA Receptor Gating of Information Flow through the Striatum<i>In Vivo</i>

2008· article· en· W1975026279 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Pablo E. Pomata, Mariano Belluscio, Luis A. Riquelme, Mario Gustavo Murer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSecretaría de Ciencia y Técnica, Universidad de Buenos AiresUniversidad de Buenos AiresMcGill UniversityJohn Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation
KeywordsNMDA receptorMedium spiny neuronNeuroscienceStriatumReceptorLong-term depressionSynaptic plasticityGatingChemistryIn vivoBiologyAMPA receptorDopamineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A role of NMDA receptors in corticostriatal synaptic plasticity is widely acknowledged. However, the conditions that allow NMDA receptor activation in the striatum in vivo remain obscure. Here we show that NMDA receptors contribute to sustain the membrane potential of striatal medium spiny projection neurons close to threshold during spontaneous UP states in vivo. Moreover, we found that the blockade of striatal NMDA receptors reduces markedly the spontaneous firing of ensembles of medium spiny neurons during slow waves in urethane-anesthetized rats. We speculate that recurrent activation of NMDA receptors during UP states allows off-line information flow through the striatum and system level consolidation during habit formation.

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 score0.003

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations35
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuroscience→Same topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research→French-language works237,207→