MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Motor cortex stroke impairs individual digit movement in skilled reaching by the rat

2008· article· en· W2021309630 on OpenAlexafffund
Mariam Alaverdashvili, Ian Q. Whishaw

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Neuroscience · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNumerical digitMotor cortexTask (project management)PsychologyMovement (music)NeuroscienceCortex (anatomy)Motor controlPhysical medicine and rehabilitationForelimbCommunicationAudiologyMedicineMathematicsArithmeticPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over 30 years ago, Castro [(1972) Brain Res., 37, 173-185] proposed that motor cortex (MtCx) ablation produced deficits in digital usage that contributed to the rat's impairments in a reach-to-eat task, but the impairment was not directly documented. The present study examined digit use in control rats and rats with MtCx lesions using high-speed (1000 f/s) video recording. Temporal and spatial characteristics of individual digits were evaluated by digitizing the tip of the digits and digital joints using the motion measurement system Peak Motus. Control rats displayed differential digital use during grasping actions and MtCx damage reduced individual digit movement, both as the paw was pre-shaped for grasping and in the grasping action itself. The findings show that although grasping is retained following MtCx damage, MtCx is essential for dexterous movement. The results are discussed in relation to the idea that rodent MtCx is not only necessary for rotatory movements of the limb, but also for digital control and in relation to the similarities of rodent digit use to that described for primates.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.193 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations72
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of NeuroscienceSame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207