Review Article: Glutamate Receptors in Peripheral Tissues: Current Knowledge, Future Research, and Implications for Toxicology
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We illustrate the specific cellular distribution of different subtypes of glutamate receptors (GluRs) in peripheral neural and non-neural tissues. Some of the noteworthy locations are the heart, kidney, lungs, ovary, testis and endocrine cells. In these tissues the GluRs may be important in mediating cardiorespiratory, endocrine and reproductive functions which include hormone regulation, heart rhythm, blood pressure, circulation and reproduction. Since excitotoxicity of excitatory amino acids (EAAs) in the CNS is intimately associated with the GluRs, the toxic effects may be more generalized than initially assumed. Currently there is not enough evidence to suggest the reassessment of the regulated safety levels for these products in food since little is known on how these receptors work in each of these organs. More research is required to assess the extent that these receptors participate in normal functions and/or in the development of diseases and how they mediate the toxic effects of EAAs. Non-neural GluRs may be involved in normal cellular functions such as excitability and cell to cell communication. This is supported by the wide distribution in plants and animals from invertebrates to primates. The important tasks for the future will be to clarify the multiple biological roles of the GluRs in neural and non-neural tissues and identify the conditions under in which these are up- or down-regulated. Then this could provide new therapeutic strategies to target GluRs outside the CNS.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it