MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975244560 · doi:10.1002/ddr.20170

Hippocampal slice cultures integrated with multi‐electrode arrays: a model for study of long‐term drug effects on synaptic activity

2007· article· en· W1975244560 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tarun Ahuja, John G. Mielke, Tanya Comas, Balu Chakravarthy, Geoffrey Mealing

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug Development Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Biological Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLong-term potentiationNeuroscienceHippocampal formationSynaptic plasticityPopulationBiologyHippocampusChemistryMedicineBiochemistryReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Technological limitations have restricted the ability to determine chronic drug effects on synaptic function from in vitro preparations. In earlier studies, the extracellular recording duration was limited to less than 10 h and only a distinct population of neurons was examined. To address these limitations, we used organotypic hippocampal slice cultures integrated with planar multi‐electrode arrays (MEA‐OHSC), which permitted within‐slice comparisons and examination of long‐term changes across multiple populations of neurons. Long‐term potentiation (LTP) is a widely accepted measure of synaptic plasticity, and is believed to be a cellular mechanism underlying learning and memory. Amyloid‐β protein (Aβ) is a 40–42 amino acid peptide that is the primary element of senile plaques, a pathological hallmark of Alzheimer's disease (AD). In contrast to earlier studies, MEA‐OHSCs allowed for long‐term administration of Aβ1–42 to more closely model the chronic nature of AD pathogenesis. Prior to Aβ1–42 exposure, the CA1 region displayed robust potentiation, but afterwards the ability to induce LTP was nearly absent. Spatial analysis illustrated, for the first time, the substantial area of LTP induction, and clearly showed the global loss of this plasticity after long‐term Aβ exposure. The MEA‐OHSC model characterized here presents an ideal platform for examining the effects chronic exposure of a bioactive compound can have on a cellular correlate of memory. This model could also be used to screen potential therapeutics that may influence synaptic activity. Drug Dev Res 68:84–93, 2007. Published 2007 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.; Canadian Crown Copyright

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrug Development ResearchSame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207