NMDA-dependent recovery of visual acuity following monocular deprivation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Monocular deprivation leads to anatomical and physiological changes in the visual cortex, as well as reduced visual acuities. These changes can be ameliorated by reverse occlusion. The visual and physiological recovery, however, is labile and results in poor vision in both eyes — bilateral amblyopia (Murphy & Mitchell, 1986). The underlying causes of these behavioral and physiological results have been a puzzle, however, the visuotopic loss of NMDA expression in the visual cortex promoted by monocular deprivation provides some clues. We initiated a series of studies to determine the rearing conditions that promote recovery of NMDA expression and whether those conditions would lead to permanent recovery of visual acuity. Kittens were reared with various regimens of monocular deprivation and reverse occlusion by eyelid suture. The tangential pattern of NMDAR1 immunostaining was analyzed in supragranular sections from unfolded and flattened visual cortex. Visual acuity was measured using the jumping stand. We found that reverse occlusion alone did not promote recovery of NMDAR1 expression, however, just 4 days of binocular vision after monocular deprivation did promote recovery of NMDAR1. We designed a new rearing regimen, based on the role of NMDA in long-term plasticity in the visual cortex, that promoted both recovery of NMDAR1 expression and permanent recovery of visual acuity after reverse occlusion. These results suggest that NMDA expression is required for permanent recovery of visual acuity and provide a key piece to solving the puzzle of bilateral amblyopia.
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".