MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<i>Drosophila Hyperkinetic</i>Mutants Have Reduced Sleep and Impaired Memory

2007· article· en· W2033681425 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Daniel Bushey, Reto Huber, Giulio Tononi, Chiara Cirelli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute of General Medical SciencesAdvanced Research Projects Agency
KeywordsSleep (system call)MutantSleep deprivationAlleleTransgeneNeuroscienceBiologyMemory impairmentGeneticsLoss functionWild typeCognitionPsychologyGenePhenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In mammals, sleep is thought to be important for health, cognition, and memory. Fruit flies share most features of mammalian sleep, and a recent study found that Drosophila lines carrying loss-of-function mutations in Shaker (Sh) are short sleeping, suggesting that the Sh current plays a major role in regulating daily sleep amount. The Sh current is potentiated by a beta modulatory subunit coded by Hyperkinetic (Hk). Here, we demonstrate that severe loss-of-function mutations of Hk reduce sleep and do so primarily by affecting the Sh current. Moreover, we prove, using a transgenic approach, that a wild-type copy of Hk is sufficient to restore normal sleep. Furthermore, we show that short-sleeping Hk mutant lines have a memory deficit, whereas flies carrying a weaker hypomorphic Hk allele have normal sleep and normal memory. By comparing six short-sleeping Sh lines with two normal sleeping ones, we also found that only alleles that reduce sleep also impair memory. These data identify a gene, Hk, which is necessary to maintain normal sleep, and provide genetic evidence that short sleep and poor memory are linked.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations168
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207