MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056722870 · doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(00)81150-2

Calcineurin-Mediated LTD of GABAergic Inhibition Underlies the Increased Excitability of CA1 Neurons Associated with LTP

2000· article· en· W2056722870 on OpenAlexaff
You Lü, Isabelle M. Mansuy, Eric R. Kandel, John Roder

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuron · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsLong-term potentiationNeuroscienceCalcineurinGABAergicChemistryBiologyInhibitory postsynaptic potentialMedicineInternal medicineBiochemistryReceptorTransplantation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coincident pre- and postsynaptic activity generates long-term potentiation (LTP), a possible cellular model of learning and memory. LTP has two components: (1) an increase in the excitatory postsynaptic potential (EPSP), and (2) an increase in the ability of the EPSP to generate a spike (E-S coupling of LTP). We have used pharmacological and genetic approaches to address the molecular nature of E-S coupling in CA1 pyramidal neurons. Blockade of the Ca2+-sensitive phosphatase, calcineurin, prevents induction of E-S coupling without interfering with LTP of the EPSP. Calcineurin produces its effect on E-S coupling by inducing a long-lasting depression (LTD) of the GABA(A)-mediated inhibitory postsynaptic potentials (IPSPs). This LTD of the IPSP was prevented by blockade of NMDA receptors. Thus, the tetanus that elicits NMDA-dependent LTP mediates a coordinately regulated double function. It produces LTP of the EPSP and, concomitantly, LTD of the IPSP that leads to enhancement of E-S coupling.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations279
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueNeuronSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207