Differential neuroplastic changes in neocortical movement representations and dendritic morphology in epilepsy‐prone and epilepsy‐resistant rat strains following high‐frequency stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The epileptogenic-prone (FAST) and epileptogenic-resistant (SLOW) rat strains have become a valuable tool for investigating the neurochemical and neurophysiological basis of epilepsy. This study examined the two strains with respect to their neocortical movement representations and cortical layer III pyramidal cell dendritic morphology in both control and potentiated conditions. FAST and SLOW rats received high-frequency stimulation of the corpus callosum in order to induce long-term polysynaptic potentiation of the transcallosal pathway to the sensorimotor neocortex. Baseline-evoked potentials of this pathway were recorded in the left hemisphere before stimulation, and following 5, 10, 15 and 20 days of high-frequency stimulation. All rats then underwent high-resolution intracortical microstimulation (ICMS) in order to assess functional movement representations of the left caudal forelimb area of the sensorimotor cortex. Immediately following ICMS, the brains were stained with the Golgi-Cox method, and the length, branching and spine density of frontal and occipital neocortical layer III pyramidal neurons were measured. We observed that high-frequency stimulation induced similar increases in polysynaptic potentiation in both rat strains; however, only the FAST strain showed an increase (doubling) in the size of their motor maps. We also observed decreases in dendritic length and branching in the FAST rats, and the opposite profile in the SLOW rats. The potentiated FAST rats also showed an increase in spine density. Our results suggest that differences in susceptibility to epileptogenesis may result in a differential response to stimulation-induced plasticity.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".