MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Enhancement of Vision by Monocular Deprivation in Adult Mice

2006· article· en· W2060287168 on OpenAlexafffund
Glen T. Prusky, N. M. Alam, Robert M. Douglas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMonocular deprivationVisual cortexMonocularOcular dominanceSensory deprivationVisual acuityOptokinetic reflexNeurosciencePsychologyNeuroplasticityBinocular visionOphthalmologyEye movementMedicineSensory systemOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plasticity of vision mediated through binocular interactions has been reported in mammals only during a "critical" period in juvenile life, wherein monocular deprivation (MD) causes an enduring loss of visual acuity (amblyopia) selectively through the deprived eye. Here, we report a different form of interocular plasticity of vision in adult mice in which MD leads to an enhancement of the optokinetic response (OKR) selectively through the nondeprived eye. Over 5 d of MD, the spatial frequency sensitivity of the OKR increased gradually, reaching a plateau of approximately 36% above pre-deprivation baseline. Eye opening initiated a gradual decline, but sensitivity was maintained above pre-deprivation baseline for 5-6 d. Enhanced function was restricted to the monocular visual field, notwithstanding the dependence of the plasticity on binocular interactions. Activity in visual cortex ipsilateral to the deprived eye was necessary for the characteristic induction of the enhancement, and activity in visual cortex contralateral to the deprived eye was necessary for its maintenance after MD. The plasticity also displayed distinct learning-like properties: Active testing experience was required to attain maximal enhancement and for enhancement to persist after MD, and the duration of enhanced sensitivity after MD was extended by increasing the length of MD, and by repeating MD. These data show that the adult mouse visual system maintains a form of experience-dependent plasticity in which the visual cortex can modulate the normal function of subcortical visual pathways.

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)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations118
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207