Mutations of the<i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i>Brain-Specific Inorganic Phosphate Transporter<i>eat-4</i>Affect Habituation of the Tap–Withdrawal Response without Affecting the Response Itself
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The studies reported here were designed to investigate the role of the mutation eat-4 in the response to tap and in habituation in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. In C. elegans eat-4 has been found to affect a number of glutamatergic pathways. It has been hypothesized to positively regulate glutaminase activity and therefore glutamatergic neurotransmission. In the eat-4(ky5) loss-of-function worms, there is presumably insufficient glutamate available for sustained transmission. In the experiments reported here eat-4 worms showed no differences from wild-type in the magnitude of response to a single tap, indicating that the neural circuit underlying the response was intact and functional in the mutant worms. However, when eat-4 worms were given repeated taps the resulting habituation was different from that seen in wild-type worms: eat-4 worms habituate more rapidly and recover more slowly than wild-type worms at all interstimulus intervals tested. In addition, eat-4 worms do not show dishabituation. The same transgene rescues pharyngeal activity defects and both the habituation and dishabituation deficits seen in the eat-4 worms. Our results suggest that neurotransmitter regulation plays a role in habituation and may play a role in dishabituation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".