Modulation of the Receptive Fields of Midbrain Neurons Elicited by Thalamic Electrical Stimulation through Corticofugal Feedback
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ascending and descending projections of the central auditory system form multiple tonotopic loops. This study specifically examines the tonotopic pathway from the auditory thalamus to the auditory cortex and then to the auditory midbrain in mice. We observed the changes of receptive fields in the central nucleus of the inferior colliculus of the midbrain evoked by focal electrical stimulation of the ventral division of the medial geniculate body of the thalamus. The receptive field of an auditory neuron was characterized by five parameters: the best frequency, minimum threshold, bandwidth, size of receptive field, and average spike number. We found that focal thalamic stimulation changed the parametric values characterizing the recorded collicular receptive fields toward those characterizing the stimulated thalamic receptive fields. Cortical inactivation with muscimol prevented the development of the collicular plasticity induced by focal thalamic stimulation. Our data suggest that the intact colliculo-thalamo-cortico-collicular loops are important for the coordination of sound-guided plasticity in the central auditory system.
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".