MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057596757 · doi:10.1152/jn.00577.2006

Identification of Basolateral Amygdala Projection Cells and Interneurons Using Extracellular Recordings

2006· article· en· W2057596757 on OpenAlexaff
Ekaterina Likhtik, Joe Guillaume Pelletier, Andrei T. Popescu, Denis Paré

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsNeuroscienceProjection (relational algebra)Basolateral amygdalaAntidromicExtracellularInhibitory postsynaptic potentialChemistryElectrophysiologyBiologyAmygdalaComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study tested whether firing rate and spike shape could be used to distinguish projection cells from interneurons in extracellular recordings of basolateral amygdala (BLA) neurons. To this end, we recorded BLA neurons in isoflurane-anesthetized animals with tungsten microelectrodes. Projection cells were identified by antidromic activation from cortical projection sites of the BLA. Although most projection cells fired spontaneously at low rates (<1 Hz), an important subset fired at higher rates (up to 6.8 Hz). In fact, the distribution of firing rates in projection cells and unidentified BLA neurons overlapped extensively, even though the latter cell group presumably contains a higher proportion of interneurons. The only difference between the two distributions was a small subset (5.1%) of unidentified neurons with unusually high firing rates (9-16 Hz). Similarly, distributions of spike durations in both cell groups were indistinguishable, although most of the fast-firing neurons had spike durations at the low end of the distribution. However, we observed that spike durations depended on the exact position of the electrode with respect to the recorded cell, varying by as much as 0.7 ms. Thus neither firing rate nor spike waveform allowed for unequivocal separation of projection cells from interneurons. Nevertheless, we propose the use of two firing rate cutoffs to obtain relatively pure samples of projection cells and interneurons: < or =1 Hz for projection cells and > or =7 Hz for fast-spiking interneurons. Supplemented with spike-duration cutoffs of > or =0.7 ms for projection cells and < or =0.5 ms for interneurons, this approach should keep instances of misclassifications to a minimum.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations67
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207