Effect of ginkgolides on <i>β</i>‐amyloid‐suppressed acetylocholine release from rat hippocampal slices
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As Ginkgo has been shown to improve age-related memory de fi cits and beta-amyloid-related peptides have been suggested to play a signi fi cant role in memory degeneration in Alzheimer's disease, the present study was carried out to examine the effect of two major ginkgolides, A and B, on beta-amyloid peptide-modulated acetylcholine (ACh) release from hippocampal brain slices. Addition of beta-amyloid fragment(25-35) (0.01-1 micro M) in the superfusion medium suppressed the K(+)-evoked [(3)H]-ACh release from the rat hippocampal slices in a concentration-related manner; a 40% reduction in ACh out fl ow was observed with the highest amyloid concentration used (1 micro M). Inclusion of ginkgolide B (GKB, 0.01-10 micro M) caused a concentration-related reversion of the inhibitory effect elicited by the effective concentration of beta-amyloid (1 micro M). The reversal of the beta-amyloid-inhibited ACh release by GKB (1 micro M) was not blocked by tetrodotoxin (1 micro M) indicating a direct interaction of GKB on the cholinergic nerve terminals. In contrast, addition of the same concentration range of ginkgolide A (GKA, 0.01-10 micro M) had no effect on beta-amyloid-inhibited ACh release. These results suggest that GKB may elicit its anti-amnesic effect by minimizing the inhibitory effect of beta-amyloid peptides on cholinergic transmission.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it