Lateral Hypothalamic Signaling Mechanisms Underlying Feeding Stimulation: Differential Contributions of Src Family Tyrosine Kinases to Feeding Triggered Either by NMDA Injection or by Food Deprivation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In rats, feeding can be triggered experimentally using many approaches. Included among these are (1) food deprivation and (2) acute microinjection of the neurotransmitter l-glutamate (Glu) or its receptor agonist NMDA into the lateral hypothalamic area (LHA). Under both paradigms, the NMDA receptor (NMDA-R) within the LHA appears critically involved in transferring signals encoded by Glu to stimulate feeding. However, the intracellular mechanisms underlying this signal transfer are unknown. Because protein-tyrosine kinases (PTKs) participate in NMDA-R signaling mechanisms, we determined PTK involvement in LHA mechanisms underlying both types of feeding stimulation through food intake and biochemical measurements. LHA injections of PTK inhibitors significantly suppressed feeding elicited by LHA NMDA injection (up to 69%) but only mildly suppressed deprivation feeding (24%), suggesting that PTKs may be less critical for signals underlying this feeding behavior. Conversely, food deprivation but not NMDA injection produced marked increases in apparent activity for Src PTKs and in the expression of Pyk2, an Src-activating PTK. When considered together, the behavioral and biochemical results demonstrate that, although it is easier to suppress NMDA-elicited feeding by PTK inhibitors, food deprivation readily drives PTK activity in vivo. The latter result may reflect greater PTK recruitment by neurotransmitter receptors, distinct from the NMDA-R, that are activated during deprivation-elicited but not NMDA-elicited feeding. These results also demonstrate how the use of only one feeding stimulation paradigm may fail to reveal the true contributions of signaling molecules to pathways underlying feeding behavior in vivo.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".