Age‐dependent pre‐ and postsynaptic distribution of AMPA receptors at synapses in CA3 stratum radiatum of hippocampal slice cultures compared with intact brain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organotypic slice cultures of rat hippocampus are widely used as experimental preparations for the study of synaptic plasticity, but their degree of correspondence with intact brain is not fully known. Here, using postembedding immunogold labelling, we describe the ultrastructural distribution of AMPA-type glutamate receptors (GluR1-4) in CA3 stratum radiatum of organotypic hippocampal slice cultures at 10 days to 11 weeks in vitro and compare the labelling with intact brain of corresponding age. In both types of preparation, the 11-week-old samples contained the highest proportion of AMPA receptor-like immunoreactive synapses. The incidence of labelled synapses, however, was higher in vivo (49%) than in vitro (24%). The intensity of labelling (number of gold particles per labelled synapse) also increased with age and was also higher in vivo than in vitro. In both organotypic cultures and intact brain, labelling was frequently found at presynaptic sites, often attached to vesicular structures. The specificity of these findings was supported both by light microscopic immunolabelling of GluR2/3 subunits and by electron microscopic double labelling of different epitopes of the GluR2 subunit. The vesicular localization of AMPA receptors was supported by Western blot analysis of subcellular fractions. Morphological evidence of presynaptic excitatory innervation of glutamatergic neurons supports a functional role for presynaptically located AMPA receptors. Our results therefore suggest that AMPA receptors occur in both pre- and postsynaptic profiles and that the distribution of AMPA receptors in cultured brain slices is fundamentally similar to intact brain, but that synaptic maturation may be retarded in vitro.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".