MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Enhanced Plasticity in Zincergic, Cortical Circuits after Exposure to Enriched Environments

2008· article· en· W2074400711 on OpenAlexaff
Amy S. Nakashima, Richard H. Dyck

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental enrichmentNeuroplasticityZincPlasticityBiologyNeuroscienceCortex (anatomy)Cell biologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the plethora of reports that demonstrate plasticity in the mammalian cerebral cortex, the characterization of the cellular mechanisms that mediate it is sparse. Here, we show that the magnitude of the experience-dependent regulation of vesicular zinc is significantly increased through enriched-environment housing. Mice were reared either in a deprived environment and subsequently housed in deprived, minimally enriched, or enriched conditions after the removal of the c-row of vibrissae or reared in an enriched environment before and after vibrissae removal. Levels of vesicular zinc were assessed in deprived and nondeprived barrels 6 h to 14 d after vibrissae removal. We found that housing in enriched environmental conditions resulted in a greater change in vesicular zinc levels than did other housing conditions; however, this effect was dependent on both the magnitude and duration of enrichment. Our data indicate that enriched-environment housing has profound effects on the regulation of vesicular zinc that occurs concurrently with experience-dependent plasticity, suggesting a role for zinc in the multitude of cortical modifications associated with enriched environments.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations18
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuroscience→Same topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research→French-language works237,207→