MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078696233 · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2002.020321

Non‐ionotropic cross‐talk between AMPA and NMDA receptors in rodent hippocampal neurones

2002· article· en· W2078696233 on OpenAlexafffund
Donglin Bai, Robert U. Muller, John Roder

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthALS Society of Canada
KeywordsAMPA receptorIonotropic effectNMDA receptorGlutamate receptorChemistryNeuroscienceExcitatory postsynaptic potentialHippocampal formationKainate receptorInhibitory postsynaptic potentialCell biologyBiophysicsReceptorBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many fast excitatory synapses in the hippocampus are enriched with both AMPARs (alpha-amino-3-hydroxyl-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionate receptors) and NMDARs (N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors). Their proximity allows them to be activated simultaneously by the same neurotransmitter, L-glutamate. Activation of AMPARs leads to influx of sodium and calcium ions, which can increase or decrease NMDAR activity through sodium concentration-dependent cascades or a calcium-calmodulin-dependent inactivation process, respectively. Here we provide evidence that the activation of AMPARs inhibits NMDARs through a non-ionotropic mechanism. NMDA-induced current in isolated rat CA1 hippocampal cells and nucleated patches of cultured mouse hippocampal neurones decreased when AMPARs were activated. Conversely, when AMPARs were blocked, the NMDA component of glutamate-induced current increased. The inhibitory action of AMPAR activation on NMDAR-mediated current depends upon the open state of AMPA channels and rapidly diminishes after deactivation of AMPARs. The inhibitory action was independent of membrane voltage, univalent cation fluxes and calcium influx. The AMPA-NMDA cross-inhibition also occurred in evoked synaptic current in CA1 neurones from intact mouse hippocampal slices. This cross-talk may play a role in preventing overexcitation during bursting activities in the hippocampus.

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 score0.002

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations22
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207