Experience‐dependent plasticity of visual acuity in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rats have become a popular model for investigating the mechanisms underlying ocular dominance plasticity; however, no quantitative assessment of the effects of visual deprivation on behavioural acuity has been reported in this species. We measured the spatial acuity of monocularly and binocularly deprived rats with a visual discrimination task. The average spatial acuity of normal rats and rats deprived of vision after postnatal day 40 was approximately 1 cycle/degree. Monocular deprivation up to postnatal day 40 resulted in a 30% decrease in acuity and there was no recovery after 8 months. Identical binocular deprivation produced a comparable but significantly smaller reduction in acuity. The deleterious effects of monocular and binocular deprivation on visual acuity indicate that the development of cortical receptive field properties related to spatial tuning are affected by both monocular and binocular deprivation. The similarities in the effects of visual deprivation on visual acuity between rats and other mammals confirm that rats are a good model system for studying the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying experience-dependent visual plasticity.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".