MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093693651 · doi:10.1152/jn.00506.2013

Dendritic SK channels convert NMDA-R-dependent LTD to burst timing-dependent plasticity

2013· article· en· W2093693651 on OpenAlexafffund
Erik Harvey‐Girard, Leonard Maler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNeuroscienceElectric fishPostsynaptic potentialSensory systemElectroreceptionLong-term potentiationSynaptic plasticityBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feedback and descending projections from higher to lower brain centers play a prominent role in all vertebrate sensory systems. Feedback might be optimized for the specific sensory processing tasks in their target brain centers, but it has been difficult to connect the properties of feedback synapses to sensory tasks. Here, we use the electrosensory system of a gymnotiform fish (Apteronotus leptorhynchus) to address this problem. Cerebellar feedback to pyramidal cells in the first central electrosensory processing region, the electrosensory lateral line lobe (ELL), is critical for canceling spatially and temporally redundant electrosensory input. The ELL contains four electrosensory maps, and we have previously analyzed the synaptic and network bases of the redundancy reduction mechanism in a map (centrolateral segment; CLS) believed to guide electrolocation behavior. In the CLS, only long-term depression was induced by pairing feedback presynaptic and pyramidal cell postsynaptic bursts. In this paper, we turn to an ELL map (lateral segment; LS) known to encode electrocommunication signals. We find remarkable differences in synaptic plasticity of the morphologically identical cerebellar feedback input to the LS. In the LS, pyramidal cell SK channels permit long-term potentiation (LTP) of feedback synapses when pre- and postsynaptic bursts occur at the same time. We hypothesize that LTP in this map is required for enhancing the encoding of weak electrocommunication signals. We conclude that feedback inputs that appear morphologically identical in sensory maps dedicated to different tasks, nevertheless display different synaptic plasticity rules contributing to differential sensory processing in these maps.

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 score0.004

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)0.0010.001

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 head0.332
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations13
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207