Distinct modulatory roles of sigma receptor subtypes on glutamatergic responses in the dorsal hippocampus
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sigma ligands have been previously shown to modulate the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) response in the dorsal hippocampus, such that low doses of sigma agonists dose-dependently potentiate the response. Recent studies with the sigma ligand 4-IBP found it to act differently from the sigma ligands (+)-pentazocine and DTG in the modulation of 5-HT firing activity in the dorsal raphe nucleus (DRN), as its effects were not blocked by the sigma antagonists which reversed those of (+)-pentazocine or DTG. Thus, this study set out to characterize 4-IBP's action at sigma receptors using the hippocampal paradigm of sigma ligand activity. Interestingly, we found that in 50% of the neurons recorded, 4-IBP (20 microg/kg i.v.) produced a potentiation of both NMDA- and quisqualate (QUIS)-induced responses. In the other 50% of neurons, 4-IBP produced an attenuation of both QUIS and NMDA responses. The sigma1 antagonist NE-100 blocked the reduction induced by 4-IBP, while the nonselective sigma antagonist haloperidol blocked all responses induced by 4-IBP. These data suggest that, in this model, 4-IBP may be acting as an agonist or inverse agonist of sigma receptors. Furthermore, the initial responses to NMDA and QUIS were higher in the group in which 4-IBP induced an attenuation of the firing activity. This suggests a modulatory role for 4-IBP on glutamatergic neurotransmission in the hippocampus, which appears to involve two distinct pathways, mediated by different sigma1 receptor subtypes, an NE-100 and haloperidol-sensitive sigma1 receptor, and an NE-100-insensitive, haloperidol-sensitive sigma1 receptor. This modulatory role has implications for disorders that involve glutamatergic transmission in the hippocampus.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it