MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cholinergic Contributions to Supramodal Attentional Processes in Rats

2014· article· en· W2037201205 on OpenAlexafffund
Vladimir Ljubojevic, Paul Luu, Eve De Rosa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicOlfactory and Sensory Function Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNeuroscienceBasal forebrainCholinergicNucleus basalisPsychologyCholinergic neuronAcetylcholineNeocortexCholine acetyltransferaseNeurochemicalMedicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cholinergic neurotransmission has been shown to play an important role in modulating attentional processing of visual stimuli. However, it is not yet clear whether the neurochemical acetylcholine (ACh) is necessary exclusively for visual attention, or if it also contributes to attentional functions through some modality-independent (supramodal) mechanism. To answer this question, we examined the effects of reduced cortical cholinergic afferentation on both a traditional visual and a novel olfactory five-choice serial reaction time task (5-CSRTT), the benchmark rodent test of sustained attention in rats. Following the successful acquisition of both modalities of the task, the rats underwent either a cholinergic immunotoxic- or sham-lesion surgery of the nucleus basalis magnocellularis (NBM), the basal forebrain nuclei that provide the majority of neocortical ACh. Reduced cholinergic afferentation to the neocortex was induced by bilaterally infusing the cholinergic immunotoxin 192 IgG-saporin into the NBM. After surgery, ACh-NBM-lesioned rats performed comparably to sham-lesioned rats under the conditions of low attentional demand, but displayed behavioral decrements relative to the sham-lesioned rats when the attentional demands of the task were increased. Moreover, this decrement in attentional functioning correlated significantly with the number of choline acetyltransferase-immunoreactive cells in the NBM. Importantly, the nature of this behavioral decrement was identical in the visual and olfactory 5-CSRTTs. Together, these data suggest the presence of a supramodal attentional modulatory cortical network whose activity is dependent on cholinergic innervation from the NBM.

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)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
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 score0.622
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

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

Citations28
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicOlfactory and Sensory Function StudiesFrench-language works237,207