MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mesencephalic astrocyte-derived neurotrophic factor enhances nigral γ-aminobutyric acid release

2006· article· en· W1997802665 on OpenAlexaff
Chunyi Zhou, Cheng Xiao, John W. Commissiong, K. Krnjević, Jiang Hong Ye

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroreport · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Center for Complementary and Integrative HealthNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
KeywordsAstrocyteNeurotrophic factorsNeuroscienceAminobutyric acidBrain-derived neurotrophic factorCentral nervous systemChemistryNeurotrophinGlial cell line-derived neurotrophic factorBiologyEndocrinologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mesencephalic astrocyte-derived neurotrophic factor (MANF) - one of a new class of astrocyte-derived human proteins--selectively promotes the survival of dopamine neurons of the ventral midbrain. Using the whole-cell clamp technique, we looked for acute effects of MANF on gamma-aminobutyric acid type A (GABAA) receptor-mediated inhibitory postsynaptic currents (IPSCs) in dopamine neurons of the substantia nigra pars compacta of 6 to 15-day-old rats. In slices, MANF increased the amplitude of evoked IPSCs and decreased the paired pulse ratio. In mechanically dissociated cells, MANF increased the frequency of spontaneous and miniature IPSCs, without changing their mean amplitudes; and in enzymatically dissociated neurons, MANF had no effect on currents induced by exogenous GABA. The presynaptic enhancement of GABAergic inhibition may contribute to MANF's protective action on dopamine cells.

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 score0.002

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations22
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroreportSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207