MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005273706 · doi:10.1002/syn.10125

Specificity of synapse formation between <i>Lymnaea</i> heart motor neuron and muscle fiber is maintained in vitro in a soma–muscle configuration

2002· article· en· W2005273706 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas K. M. Lee, Alexander A. C. Leung, Boris L. Brezden, Ken Lukowiak, Naweed I. Syed

Bibliographic record

VenueSynapse · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSomaNeuroscienceSynapsePostsynaptic potentialBiologyNervous systemNeuronMyocyteCell typeCellCell biologyReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Precise neuronal connectivity during development is subservient to all nervous system functions in adult animals. However, the cellular mechanisms that mastermind this neuronal connectivity remain largely unknown. This lack of fundamental knowledge regarding nervous system development is due in part to the immense complexity of mammalian brain, as cell-cell interactions between defined sets of pre- and postsynaptic partners are often difficult to investigate directly. In this study, we developed a novel model system which has allowed us to reconstruct synapses between identified motor neurons and their target heart muscle cell in a soma-muscle configuration. Utilizing this soma-myocardial cell synapse model, we demonstrate that synapses between somata and heart muscle cells can be reconstructed in cell culture. The soma-myocardial cell synapses required 12-24 h to develop and thus differed temporally from conventional neuromuscular synapses (seconds to a few minutes). We also demonstrate that the synapses are target cell-type-specific and are most likely independent of transmitter phenotypic characteristics of presynaptic neurons.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSynapseSame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207