MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022307324 · doi:10.1152/jn.00263.2003

Electrophysiological Differences in the CPG Aerial Respiratory Behavior Between Juvenile and Adult<i>Lymnaea</i>

2003· article· en· W2022307324 on OpenAlexaff
Chlöe McComb, Ryanne Meems, Naweed I. Syed, Ken Lukowiak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJuvenileLymnaeaBiologyCpG siteRespirationElectrophysiologyNeuroscienceCentral pattern generatorRespiratory systemPhysiologyAnatomyInternal medicineEcologyRhythmMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intact, freely moving juvenile Lymnaea perform aerial respiration significantly less often than do adults. We therefore hypothesized that RPeD1, the central pattern generator (CPG) neuron that initiates rhythmogenesis, would be less active in juveniles than adults. Using both isolated and semi-intact preparations to directly test this hypothesis, we found the opposite; juvenile RPeD1s were significantly smaller and more excitable than RPeD1s from adults. Significant age-related differences were found in the membrane resistance (greater in juveniles), time constant (smaller in juveniles), and rheobase current (lower in juveniles), all of which would tend to make juvenile cells significantly more excitable. However, there were significant age-related differences in the synaptic connectivity within the CPG and in peripheral input to the CPG, all which favor more rhythmic activity in the adult CPG. As was the case for intact Lymnaea, juvenile semi-intact preparations perform aerial respiration less often than do adults. The difference in excitability between juvenile and adult RPeD1s is therefore not sufficient to cause increased rhythmogenesis. Age-related changes in synaptic connectivity within the respiratory CPG and in peripheral modulation allow respiratory rhythmogenesis to be more easily expressed in adults which may compensate for their decreased dependence on cutaneous respiration as their surface to volume ratio changes as the grow in size.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations42
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207