Trophic Factor-Induced Activity ‘Signature’ Regulates the Functional Expression of Postsynaptic Excitatory Acetylcholine Receptors Required for Synaptogenesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Highly coordinated and coincidental patterns of activity-dependent mechanisms ("fire together wire together") are thought to serve as inductive signals during synaptogenesis, enabling neuronal pairing between specific sub-sets of excitatory partners. However, neither the nature of activity triggers, nor the "activity signature" of long-term neuronal firing in developing/regenerating neurons have yet been fully defined. Using a highly tractable model system comprising of identified cholinergic neurons from Lymnaea, we have discovered that intrinsic trophic factors present in the Lymnaea brain-conditioned medium (CM) act as a natural trigger for activity patterns in post- but not the presynaptic neuron. Using microelectrode array recordings, we demonstrate that trophic factors trigger stereotypical activity patterns that include changes in frequency, activity and variance. These parameters were reliable indicators of whether a neuron expressed functional excitatory or inhibitory nAChRs and synapse formation. Surprisingly, we found that the post- but not the presynaptic cell exhibits these changes in activity patterns, and that the functional expression of excitatory nAChRs required neuronal somata, de novo protein synthesis and voltage gated calcium channels. In summary, our data provides novel insights into trophic factor mediated actions on neuronal activity and its specific regulation of nAChR expression.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".