Cortical Orofacial Motor Representation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jaw and tongue motor alterations may occur following changes in food consistency, but whether such changes are associated with re-organization of motor representations within the facial sensorimotor cortex is unclear. We used intracortical microstimulation (ICMS) and recordings of evoked electromyographic responses to determine jaw (anterior digastric) and tongue (genioglossus) motor representations within the histologically defined face primary motor cortex (face-M1) and adjacent somatosensory cortex (face-S1) of rats fed hard (N = 6) or soft (N = 6) diet for 2 to 3 weeks. ICMS evoked jaw and tongue responses from an extensive area within the face-M1 and a smaller area within the face-S1. A significant contralateral predominance was reflected in the number and latency of ICMS-evoked jaw responses (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the hard- and soft-diet groups in jaw and tongue motor representations, suggesting that the rat's ability to adapt to changes in diet consistency may not be associated with significant neuroplasticity of sensorimotor cortex motor outputs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".