MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Target-Specific Encoding of Response Inhibition: Increased Contribution of AMPA to NMDA Receptors at Excitatory Synapses in the Prefrontal Cortex

2010· article· en· W2049230162 on OpenAlexafffund
Scott J. Hayton, Matthew Lovett-Barron, Éric C. Dumont, Mary C. Olmstead

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaQueen's UniversityMcGill University
KeywordsNeurosciencePrefrontal cortexExcitatory postsynaptic potentialInfralimbic cortexNeurotransmissionGlutamatergicAMPA receptorBasolateral amygdalaSynaptic plasticityPsychologyAmygdalaNMDA receptorInhibitory postsynaptic potentialGlutamate receptorBiologyReceptorCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Impulse control suppresses actions that are inappropriate in one context, but may be beneficial in others. The medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) mediates this process by providing a top-down signal to inhibit competing responses, although the mechanism by which the mPFC acquires this ability is unknown. To that end, we examined synaptic changes in the mPFC associated with learning to inhibit an incorrect response. Rats were trained in a simple response inhibition task to withhold responding until a signal was presented. We then measured synaptic plasticity of excitatory synapses in the mPFC, using whole-cell patch-clamp recordings, in brain slices prepared from trained rats. Response inhibition training significantly increased the relative contribution of AMPA receptors to the overall EPSC in prelimbic, but not infralimbic, neurons of the mPFC. This potentiation of synaptic transmission closely paralleled the acquisition and extinction of response inhibition. Using a retrograde fluorescent tracer, we observed that these plastic changes were selective for efferents projecting to the ventral striatum, but not the dorsal striatum or amygdala. Therefore, we suggest that response inhibition is encoded by a selective strengthening of a subset of corticostriatal projections, uncovering a synaptic mechanism of impulse control. This information could be exploited in therapeutic interventions for disorders of impulse control, such as addiction, attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder, and schizophrenia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations41
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuroscience→Same topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research→French-language works237,207→