Cholinergic Modulation of Vibrissal Receptive Fields in Trigeminal Nuclei
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In sensory systems, it is usually considered that mesopontine cholinergic neurons exert their modulatory action in the thalamus by enhancing the relay of sensory messages during states of neural network desynchronization. Here, we report a projection heretofore unknown of these cholinergic cells to the interpolar division of the brainstem trigeminal complex in rats. After FluoroGold injection in the interpolar nucleus, a number of retrogradely labeled cells were found bilaterally in the pedunculopontine tegmental nucleus, and immunostaining revealed that the vast majority of these cells were also positive for choline acetyltransferase. Immunostaining for the acetylcholine vesicular transporter confirmed the presence of cholinergic terminals in the interpolar nucleus, where electron microscopy showed that they make symmetric and asymmetric synaptic contacts with dendrites and axon terminals. In agreement with these anatomical data, recordings in slices showed that the cholinergic agonist carbachol depolarizes large-sized interpolaris cells and increases their excitability. Local application of carbachol in vivo enhances responses to adjacent whiskers, whereas systemic administration of the cholinergic antagonist scopolamine produces an opposite effect. Together, these results show that mesopontine cholinergic neurons exert a direct, effective control over receptive field size at the very first relay stations of the vibrissal system in rodents. As far as receptive field synthesis in the lemniscal pathway relies on intersubnuclear projections from the spinal complex, it follows that cholinergic modulation of sensory transmission in the interpolar nucleus will have a direct bearing on the type of messages that is forwarded to the thalamus and cerebral cortex.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".