MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

NGF Is Essential for Hippocampal Plasticity and Learning

2009· article· en· W2069958148 on OpenAlexafffund
J. M. Conner, Kevin M. Franks, Andrea K. Titterness, Kyle Russell, David A. Merrill, Brian R. Christie, Terrence J. Sejnowski, Mark H. Tuszynski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeAlzheimer's AssociationHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsHippocampal formationLong-term potentiationNeuroscienceCholinergicNerve growth factorHippocampusCholinergic neuronNeuroplasticitySynaptic plasticityPsychologyBiologyReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nerve growth factor (NGF) is produced in the hippocampus throughout life and is retrogradely trafficked to septal cholinergic neurons, providing a potential mechanism for modulating cholinergic inputs and, thereby, hippocampal plasticity. To explore NGF modulation of hippocampal plasticity and function, NGF levels were augmented or blocked in intact adult rats, and subsequent in vivo effects on cholinergic neurons, hippocampal long-term potentiation (LTP), and learning were examined. NGF augmentation significantly enhanced cholinergic neuronal markers and facilitated induction of hippocampal LTP. Blockade of endogenous NGF significantly reduced hippocampal LTP and impaired retention of spatial memory. These findings reveal an essential role for NGF in regulating biological mechanisms related to plasticity and memory in the intact adult brain.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations188
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207