MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065066968 · doi:10.1111/ejn.12046

Sound‐specific plasticity in the primary auditory cortex as induced by the cholinergic pedunculopontine tegmental nucleus

2013· article· en· W2065066968 on OpenAlexafffund
Feng Luo, Jun Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Neuroscience · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNeuroscienceAuditory cortexBasal forebrainPedunculopontine nucleusPedunculopontine Tegmental NucleusThalamusCholinergicNucleus basalisNeuroplasticityCholinergic neuronPsychologyBiologyMedicineDeep brain stimulationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brain cholinergic modulation is essential for learning-induced plasticity of the auditory cortex. The pedunculopontine tegmental nucleus (PPTg) is an important cholinergic nucleus in the brainstem, and appears to be involved in learning and subcortical plasticity. This study confirms the involvement of the PPTg in the plasticity of the auditory cortex in mice. We show here that electrical stimulation of the PPTg paired with a tone induced drastic changes in the frequency tunings of auditory cortical neurons. Importantly, the changes in frequency tuning were highly specific to the frequency of the paired tone; the best frequency of auditory cortical neurons shifted towards the frequency of the paired tone. We further demonstrated that such frequency-specific plasticity was largely eliminated by either thalamic or cortical application of the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor antagonist atropine. Our finding suggests that the PPTg significantly contributes to auditory cortical plasticity via the auditory thalamus and cholinergic basal forebrain.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations20
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207