Role of spinal 5‐HT<sub>2</sub> receptor subtypes in quipazine‐induced hindlimb movements after a low‐thoracic spinal cord transection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A role of serotonin receptors (5-HTRs) in spinal rhythmogenesis has been proposed several years ago based mainly upon data showing that bath-applied 5-HT could elicit locomotor-like rhythms in in vitro isolated spinal cord preparations. Such a role was partially confirmed in vivo after revealing that systemically administered 5-HTR(2) agonists, such as quipazine, could induce some locomotor-like movements (LM) in completely spinal cord-transected (Tx) rodents. However, given the limited binding selectivity of currently available 5-HTR(2) agonists, it has remained difficult to determine clearly if one receptor subtype is specifically associated with LM induction. In situ hybridization, data using tissues from L1-L2 spinal cord segments, where critical locomotor network elements have been identified in mice, revealed greater 5-HTR(2A) mRNA levels in low-thoracic Tx than non-Tx animals. This expression level remained elevated for several days, specifically in the lateral intermediate zone, where peak values were detected at 1 week post-Tx and returned to normal at 3 weeks post-Tx. Behavioral and kinematic analyses revealed quipazine-induced LM in 1-week Tx mice either non-pretreated or pretreated with selective 5-HTR(2B) and/or 5-HTR(2C) antagonists. In contrast, LM completely failed to be induced by quipazine in animals pretreated with selective 5-HTR(2A) antagonists. Altogether, these results provide strong evidence suggesting that 5-HTR(2A) are specifically associated with spinal locomotor network activation and LM generation induced by quipazine in Tx animals. These findings may contribute to design drug treatments aimed at promoting locomotor function recovery in chronic spinal cord-injured patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".