A balance between excitatory and inhibitory synapses is controlled by PSD-95 and neuroligin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Factors that control differentiation of presynaptic and postsynaptic elements into excitatory or inhibitory synapses are poorly defined. Here we show that the postsynaptic density (PSD) proteins PSD-95 and neuroligin-1 (NLG) are critical for dictating the ratio of excitatory-to-inhibitory synaptic contacts. Exogenous NLG increased both excitatory and inhibitory presynaptic contacts and the frequency of miniature excitatory and inhibitory synaptic currents. In contrast, PSD-95 overexpression enhanced excitatory synapse size and miniature frequency, but reduced the number of inhibitory synaptic contacts. Introduction of PSD-95 with NLG augmented synaptic clustering of NLG and abolished NLG effects on inhibitory synapses. Interfering with endogenous PSD-95 expression alone was sufficient to reduce the ratio of excitatory-to-inhibitory synapses. These findings elucidate a mechanism by which the amounts of specific elements critical for synapse formation control the ratio of excitatory-to-inhibitory synaptic input.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".