MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Odour‐evoked [Ca<sup>2+</sup>] transients in mitral cell dendrites of frog olfactory glomeruli

2001· article· en· W2094683640 on OpenAlexafffund
Kerry R. Delaney, Ian G. Davison, Winfried Denk

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Neuroscience · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicOlfactory and Sensory Function Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsOlfactory bulbStimulationBiophysicsOlfactory epitheliumChemistryElectrophysiologyInternal medicineOlfactory systemAMPA receptorEndocrinologyEvoked potentialNeuroscienceNMDA receptorBiologyReceptorCentral nervous systemBiochemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We measured Ca2+ concentration, [Ca2+], transients in mitral cell distal apical dendritic tufts produced by physiological odour stimulation of the olfactory epithelium and electrical stimulation of the olfactory nerve (ON) using two-photon scanning and conventional wide-field microscopy of Ca2+-Green-1 dextran in an in vitro frog nose-brain preparation. Weak or strong ON shock-evoked fluorescence transients always had short latency with an onset 0-10 ms after the onset of the bulb local field potential, rapidly increasing to a peak of up to 25% fractional fluorescence change (DeltaF/F) in 10-30 ms, were blocked by 10 microM CNQX, decaying with a time constant of about 1 s. With stronger ON shocks that activated many receptor axons, an additional, delayed, sustained AP5-sensitive component (peak at approximately 0.5 s, up to 40% DeltaF/F maximum) could usually be produced. Odour-evoked [Ca2+] transients sometimes displayed a rapid onset phase that peaked within 50 ms but always had a sustained phase that peaked 0.5-1.5 s after onset, regardless of the strength of the odour or the amplitude of the response. These were considerably larger (up to 150% DeltaF/F) than those evoked by ON shock. Odour-evoked [Ca2+] transients were also distinguished from ON shock-evoked transients by tufts in different glomeruli responding with different delays (time to onset differed by up to 1.5 s between different tufts for the same odour). Odour-evoked [Ca2+] transients were increased by AMPA-kainate receptor blockade, but substantially blocked by AP5. Electrical stimulation of the lateral olfactory tract (5-6 stimuli at 10 Hz) that evoked granule cell feedback inhibition, blocked 60-100% of the odour-evoked [Ca2+] transient in tufts when delivered within about 0.5 s of the odour. LOT-mediated inhibition was blocked by 10 microM bicuculline.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.719
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.111 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations23
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of NeuroscienceSame topicOlfactory and Sensory Function StudiesFrench-language works237,207