Immunohistochemical distribution of tachykinins in the CNS of the lamprey <i>Petromyzon marinus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence of tachykinins in the CNS of vertebrates has been known for many decades, and numerous studies have described their distribution in mammals. Tachykinins were also reported in the CNS of lampreys using immunohistochemistry, chromatography, and radioimmunoassay methods, but the use of substance P (SP)-specific antibodies to reveal those tachykinins could have led to an underestimation of their number in this genus. Therefore, we carried out a new immunohistochemical study on Petromyzon marinus using a commercial polyclonal antibody that binds not only to mammalian SP, but also to other neurokinins. This antibody labeled all previously described lamprey tachykinin-containing neuronal populations, but more important, labeled new populations in several parts of the brain. These include the dorsal gray of the rostral spinal cord, the dorsal column nuclei, the octavolateral area, the nucleus of the solitary tract, the medial rhombencephalic reticular formation, the lateral tegmentum of the rostral rhombencephalon, the torus semicircularis, the optic tectum, the habenula, the mammillary area, the dorsal thalamic area, the lateral hypothalamus, and the septum area. Preabsorption experiments confirmed the binding of the antibody to neurokinins and allowed us to propose that the CNS of P. marinus contains at least two different tachykinins.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".