Activity of Vestibular Nuclei Neurons During Vestibular and Optokinetic Stimulation in the Alert Mouse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a result of the availability of genetic mutant strains and development of noninvasive eye movements recording techniques, the mouse stands as a very interesting model for bridging the gap among behavioral responses, neuronal response dynamics studied in vivo, and cellular mechanisms investigated in vitro. Here we characterized the responses of individual neurons in the mouse vestibular nuclei during vestibular (horizontal whole body rotations) and full field visual stimulation. The majority of neurons ( approximately 2/3) were sensitive to vestibular stimulation but not to eye movements. During the vestibular-ocular reflex (VOR), these neurons discharged in a manner comparable to the "vestibular only" (VO) neurons that have been previously described in primates. The remaining neurons [eye-movement-sensitive (ES) neurons] encoded both head-velocity and eye-position information during the VOR. When vestibular and visual stimulation were applied so that there was sensory conflict, the behavioral gain of the VOR was reduced. In turn, the modulation of sensitivity of VO neurons remained unaffected, whereas that of ES neurons was reduced. ES neurons were also modulated in response to full field visual stimulation that evoked the optokinetic reflex (OKR). Mouse VO neurons, however, unlike their primate counterpart, were not modulated during OKR. Taken together, our results show that the integration of visual and vestibular information in the mouse vestibular nucleus is limited to a subpopulation of neurons which likely supports gaze stabilization for both VOR and OKR.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".