GABA<sub>B</sub> Receptor‐ and Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor‐Dependent Cooperative Long‐Term Potentiation of Rat Hippocampal GABA<sub>A</sub> Synaptic Transmission
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Repetitive stimulation of Schaffer collaterals induces activity-dependent changes in the strength of polysynaptic inhibitory postsynaptic potentials (IPSPs) in hippocampal CA1 pyramidal neurons that are dependent on stimulation parameters. In the present study, we investigated the effects of two stimulation patterns, theta-burst stimulation (TBS) and 100 Hz tetani, on pharmacologically isolated monosynaptic GABAergic responses in adult CA1 pyramidal cells. Tetanization with 100 Hz trains transiently depressed both early and late IPSPs, whereas TBS induced long-term potentiation (LTP) of early IPSPs that lasted at least 30 min. Mechanisms mediating this TBS-induced potentiation were examined using whole-cell recordings. The paired-pulse ratio of monosynaptic inhibitory postsynaptic currents (IPSCs) was not affected during LTP, suggesting that presynaptic changes in GABA release are not involved in the potentiation. Bath application of the GABAB receptor antagonist CGP55845 or the group I/II metabotropic glutamate receptor antagonist E4-CPG inhibited IPSC potentiation. Preventing postsynaptic G-protein activation or Ca2+ rise by postsynaptic injection of GDP-beta-S or BAPTA, respectively, abolished LTP, indicating a G-protein- and Ca2+-dependent induction in this LTP. Finally during paired-recordings, activation of individual interneurons by intracellular TBS elicited solely short-term increases in average unitary IPSCs in pyramidal cells. These results indicate that a stimulation paradigm mimicking the endogenous theta rhythm activates cooperative postsynaptic mechanisms dependent on GABABR, mGluR, G-proteins and intracellular Ca2+, which lead to a sustained potentiation of GABAA synaptic transmission in pyramidal cells. GABAergic synapses may therefore contribute to functional synaptic plasticity in adult hippocampus.
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) | 0.001 | 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".