Taurine Blocks Spontaneous Cone Contraction but Not Horizontal Cell Dark Suppression in Isolated Goldfish Retina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of taurine on cone retinomotor movements and the responses of cone-driven horizontal cells in dark-adapted teleost retina. In isolated goldfish retina preparations maintained in the dark, cones spontaneously contracted, and the responses of horizontal cells were suppressed. Addition of 5 mM taurine to the physiological solution blocked the spontaneous contraction of cones in the dark but did not block the dark-suppression of horizontal cell responses. These results indicate that the mechanism that leads to horizontal cell dark suppression is not sensitive to taurine. Although both cone retinomotor position and horizontal cell responsiveness are known to be modulated by dopamine, the present results do not support the hypothesis that taurine inhibits dopamine release in the dark because only spontaneous cone contraction was affected by taurine. These results also indicate that spontaneous cone contraction in the dark is not the cause of horizontal cell dark suppression because, in the presence of taurine, cones were elongated yet horizontal cell responses were still suppressed. Consequently, these results make it clear that horizontal cell dark suppression is not an artifact produced by incubating isolated teleost retina preparations in taurine-free physiological solution.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".