Sub-population of cultured hippocampal astrocytes expresses neuropeptide Y Y1 receptors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The expression and pharmacological characterization of neuropeptide Y (NPY) receptors of the Y(1) subtype on cultured hippocampal neurons was reported using radioreceptor assays and immunohistochemical approaches (St-Pierre et al., 1998). The present study aimed to establish the presence of NPY Y(1) receptors on cultured hippocampal astrocytes using similar strategies. Immunocytochemical experiments were carried out using three antisera directed against distinct domains (amino acids sequence 185-203, 198-213 and 355-382) of the Y(1) receptor. Double-labeling experiments and confocal microscopy with these Y(1) receptor antisera demonstrated their recognition of the same sub-population (20%) of GFAP-positive astrocytes in culture. The immunostaining seen with all three Y(1) receptor antisera took the form of large irregular clusters distributed throughout cell bodies and processes. Further experiments using radioactive ligands confirmed the presence of NPY receptors on cultured hippocampal astrocytes. Emulsion receptor autoradiography using a newly developed ligand, [(125)I]GR231118 in the presence of PYY, hPP or BIBP3226 (1 microM), pharmacologically established the Y(1) nature of these receptors. Specific [(125)I]GR231118 binding was competed by PYY and the selective Y(1) antagonist BIBP3226 but not by hPP (a Y(4)/Y(5) agonist). Similar autoradiographic labeling patterns were obtained using [(125)I][Leu(31).Pro(34)]PYY (a Y(1)/Y(4)/Y(5) agonist) whereas [(125)I]PYY(3-36) (a Y(2)/Y(5) agonist) failed to generate any specific signal. Hence, rat cultured hippocampal astrocytes express a typical Y(1) receptor without evidence for the presence of Y(2), Y(4) or Y(5) subtypes. These data suggest a preferential regulation by NPY, acting via the Y(1) receptors, of astrocytic function.
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) | 0.001 | 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".