MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003636595 · doi:10.1152/jn.00028.2008

Intrinsic Frequency Tuning in ELL Pyramidal Cells Varies Across Electrosensory Maps

2008· article· en· W2003636595 on OpenAlexaff
W. Hamish Mehaffey, Leonard Maler, Ray W. Turner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish biology, ecology, and behavior
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectric fishSensory systemStimulus (psychology)ElectroreceptionNeurosciencePhysicsBiologyPsychologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The tuning of neuronal responsiveness to specific stimulus frequencies is an important computation across many sensory modalities. The weakly electric fish Apteronotus leptorhynchus detects amplitude modulations of a self-generated quasi-sinusoidal electric organ discharge to sense its environment. These fish have to parse a complicated electrosensory environment with a wide range of possible frequency content. One solution has been to create multiple representations of the sensory input across distinct maps in the electrosensory lateral line lobe (ELL) that participate in distinct behavioral functions. E- and I-type pyramidal cells in the ELL that process sensory input further exhibit a preferred range of stimulus frequencies in relation to the different behaviors and sensory maps. We tested the hypothesis that variations in the intrinsic spiking mechanism of E- and I-type pyramidal cells contribute to map-specific frequency tuning. We find that E-cells exhibit a systematic change in their intrinsic spike characteristics and frequency tuning across sensory maps, whereas I-cells are constant in both spike characteristics and frequency tuning. As frequency tuning becomes more high-pass in E-cells, the refractory variables of spike half-width and afterhyperpolarization magnitude increase, spike threshold increases, adaptation becomes faster, and the gain of the spiking response decreases. These findings indicate that frequency tuning across sensory maps in the ELL is supported by differences in the intrinsic spike characteristics of pyramidal cells, revealing a link between cellular biophysical properties and signal processing in sensory maps with defined behavioral roles.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.618

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations51
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicFish biology, ecology, and behaviorFrench-language works237,207