MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Uncoupling of EphA/ephrinA Signaling and Spontaneous Activity in Neural Circuit Wiring

2013· article· en· W2001463755 on OpenAlexafffund
Isabel Benjumeda, Augusto Escalante, Chris Law, Daniel Morales, Géraud Chauvin, Gerald Muça, Yaiza Coca, Joaquín Márquez, Guillermina López‐Bendito, Artur Kania, Luis M. Martı́nez, Eloı́sa Herrera

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAxon Guidance and Neuronal Signaling
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalMontreal Clinical Research Institute
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNeuroscienceAxon guidanceBiological neural networkBiologyEmbryonic stem cellGrowth coneSpinal cordAxonCell biologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classic studies have proposed that genetically encoded programs and spontaneous activity play complementary but independent roles in the development of neural circuits. Recent evidence, however, suggests that these two mechanisms could interact extensively, with spontaneous activity affecting the expression and function of guidance molecules at early developmental stages. Here, using the developing chick spinal cord and the mouse visual system to ectopically express the inwardly rectifying potassium channel Kir2.1 in individual embryonic neurons, we demonstrate that cell-intrinsic blockade of spontaneous activity in vivo does not affect neuronal identity specification, axon pathfinding, or EphA/ephrinA signaling during the development of topographic maps. However, intrinsic spontaneous activity is critical for axon branching and pruning once axonal growth cones reach their correct topographic position in the target tissues. Our experiments argue for the dissociation of spontaneous activity from hard-wired developmental programs in early phases of neural circuit formation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations36
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicAxon Guidance and Neuronal SignalingFrench-language works237,207