Link between dopamine D<sub>1</sub> and D<sub>2</sub> receptors in rat and human striatal tissues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many psychomotor behaviors depend on an interaction between dopamine D(1) and D(2) receptors. This study tested the hypothesis that agonist stimulation of dopamine D(1) receptors leads to the conversion of D(2) receptors from a state of high affinity for dopamine into a state of low affinity for dopamine. To test this hypothesis, dopamine was competed against [(3)H]raclopride for binding to rat and human striatal homogenates. Although the detection of high-affinity states of the dopamine D(2) receptor in rat or postmortem human striatum is normally difficult because the proportions of such sites are very low in the presence of physiological concentrations of sodium ions, the present work found that in the presence of 100 nM SCH 23390 to block D(1) receptors, a significant proportion of D(2) high-affinity sites were unmasked and readily revealed to be 10-35% of the D(2) population, illustrating the presence of a strong D(1)-D(2) link in both rat and human striata.
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) | 0.002 | 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".