MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100722255 · doi:10.1002/cne.20995

Differential distribution of voltage‐gated calcium channels in dopaminergic neurons of the rat retina

2006· article· en· W2100722255 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Witkovsky, Changpeng Shen, John E. McRory

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Comparative Neurology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyVoltage-dependent calcium channelNeuroscienceDopaminergicAxonCalciumT-type calcium channelRetinaCalcium channelAxon terminalR-type calcium channelDopamineP-type calcium channelCell biologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We studied by immunocytochemistry and Western blots the identity and cellular distribution of voltage-gated calcium channels within dopaminergic neurons of the rat retina. The aim was to associate particular calcium channel subtypes with known activities of the neuron (e.g., transmitter release from axon terminals). Five voltage-gated calcium channels were identified: alpha1A, alpha1B, alpha1E, alpha1F, and alpha1H. All of these, except the alpha1B subtype, were found within dopaminergic perikarya. The alpha1B channels were concentrated at axon terminal rings, together with alpha1A calcium channels. In contrast, alpha1H calcium channels were most abundant in the dendrites, and alpha1F calcium channels were restricted to the perikaryon. The alpha1E calcium channel was present at such a low density that its cellular distribution beyond the perikaryon could not be determined. Our findings are consistent with the available pharmacological data indicating that alpha1A and alpha1B calcium channels control the major fraction of dopamine release in the rat retina.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations18
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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