An Endogenous Glutamatergic Drive onto Somatic Motoneurons Contributes to the Stereotypical Pattern of Muscle Tone across the Sleep–Wake Cycle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Skeletal muscle tone is modulated in a stereotypical pattern across the sleep-wake cycle. Abnormalities in this modulation contribute to most of the major sleep disorders; therefore, characterizing the neurochemical substrate responsible for transmitting a sleep-wake drive to somatic motoneurons needs to be determined. Glutamate is an excitatory neurotransmitter that modulates motoneuron excitability; however, its role in regulating motoneuron excitability and muscle tone during natural sleep-wake behaviors is unknown. Therefore, we used reverse-microdialysis, electrophysiology, pharmacological, and histological methods to determine how changes in glutamatergic neurotransmission within the trigeminal motor pool contribute to the sleep-wake pattern of masseter muscle tone in behaving rats. We found that blockade of non-NMDA and NMDA glutamate receptors (via CNQX and d-AP-5) on trigeminal motoneurons reduced waking masseter tone to sleeping levels, indicating that masseter tone is maximal during alert waking because motoneurons are activated by an endogenous glutamatergic drive. This wake-related drive is switched off in non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep, and this contributes to the suppression of muscle tone during this state. We also show that a functional glutamatergic drive generates the muscle twitches that characterize phasic rapid-eye movement (REM) sleep. However, loss of a waking glutamatergic drive is not sufficient for triggering the motor atonia that characterizes REM sleep because potent activation of either AMPA or NMDA receptors on trigeminal motoneurons was unable to reverse REM atonia. We conclude that an endogenous glutamatergic drive onto somatic motoneurons contributes to the stereotypical pattern of muscle tone during wakefulness, NREM sleep, and phasic REM sleep but not during tonic REM sleep.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".