MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008829541 · doi:10.1016/j.febslet.2005.10.051

The Arg473Cys‐neuroligin‐1 mutation modulates NMDA mediated synaptic transmission and receptor distribution in hippocampal neurons

2005· article· en· W2008829541 on OpenAlexaff
Houman Khosravani, Christophe Altier, Gerald W. Zamponi, Michael A. Colicos

Bibliographic record

VenueFEBS Letters · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of California, San DiegoNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsNeuroliginNMDA receptorNeurexinNeuroscienceExcitatory postsynaptic potentialBiologyPostsynaptic densityNeurotransmissionHippocampal formationSynaptic plasticityPostsynaptic potentialCell biologyReceptorInhibitory postsynaptic potentialBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synapses mediate communication between neurons, thus playing a fundamental role in information processing in the CNS. Neuroligins form a family of heterophilic synaptic cell adhesion molecules, and neuroligin 1 (NL1) has been shown to be involved in the formation of excitatory synapses and have been suggested to associate indirectly with NMDA receptors by common binding to PSD95. A mutation in neuroligin 3 (Arg451Cys-NL3, human sequence numbering) identified in autistic patients is associated with altered spine density and has reduced binding capacity for its presynaptic partner beta-neurexin. Here, we investigated the role of NL1 and the homologous NL1 mutation Arg473Cys-NL1 (R473C-NL1) in excitatory synaptic transmission and NMDA receptor distribution. We demonstrate that R473C-NL1, when expressed in cultured hippocampal neurons, can induce a dramatic increase in NMDA current amplitude and that this change is accompanied by NMDA receptor clustering in the postsynaptic cell.

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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations20
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEBS LettersSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207