Pre‐synaptic and post‐synaptic localization of EphA4 and EphB2 in adult mouse forebrain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ephrin receptors EphA4 and EphB2 have been implicated in synaptogenesis and long-term potentiation in the cerebral cortex and hippocampus, where they are generally viewed as post-synaptic receptors. To determine the precise distribution of EphA4 and EphB2 in mature brain synapses, we used subcellular fractionation and electron microscopy to examine the adult mouse forebrain/midbrain. EphA4 and EphB2 were both enriched in microsomes and synaptosomes. In synaptosomes, they were present in the membrane and the synaptic vesicle fractions. While EphA4 was tightly associated with PSD-95-enriched post-synaptic density fractions, EphB2 was easily extracted with detergents. In contrast, both receptors were found in the pre-synaptic active zone fraction. By electron microscopy, EphA4 was mainly detected in axon terminals, whereas EphB2 was more frequently detected in large dendritic shafts, in the hippocampus and cerebral cortex. However, in the ventrobasal thalamus, EphB2 was detected most frequently in axon terminals and thin dendritic shafts. The localization of EphA4 and EphB2 in multiple compartments of neurons and synaptic junctions suggests that they interact with several distinct scaffolding proteins and play diverse roles at synapses.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".