Asymmetric Recovery in Cerebellar-Deficient Mice Following Unilateral Labyrinthectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The term "vestibular compensation" refers to the resolution of motor deficits resulting from a peripheral vestibular lesion. We investigated the role of the cerebellum in the compensation process by characterizing the vestibuloocular reflex (VOR) evoked by head rotations at frequencies and velocities similar to those in natural behaviors in wild-type (WT) versus cerebellar-deficient Lurcher (Lc/+) mice. We found that during exploratory activity, normal mice produce head rotations largely consisting of frequencies < or =4 Hz and velocities and accelerations as large as 400 degrees/s and 5,000 degrees/s2, respectively. Accordingly, the VOR was characterized using sinusoidal rotations (0.2-4 Hz) as well as transient impulses (approximately 400 degrees/s; approximately 2,000 degrees/s2). Before lesions, WT and Lc/+ mice produced similar VOR responses to sinusoidal rotation. Lc/+ mice, however, had significantly reduced gains for transient stimuli. After unilateral labyrinthectomy, VOR recovery followed a similar course for WT and Lc/+ groups during the first week: gain was reduced by 80% for ipsilesionally directed head rotations on day 1 and improved for both strains to values of approximately 0.4 by day 5. Moreover, responses evoked by contralesionally directed rotations returned to prelesion in both strains within this period. However, unlike WT, which showed improving responses to ipsilesionally directed rotations, recovery plateaued after first week for Lc/+ mice. Our results show that despite nearly normal recovery in the acute phase, long-term compensation is compromised in Lc/+. We conclude that cerebellar pathways are critical for long-term restoration of VOR during head rotation toward the lesioned side, while noncerebellar pathways are sufficient to restore proper gaze stabilization during contralesionally directed movements.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".