Epileptogenesis Induced by Alternate‐site Kindling in Bilateral Hippocampi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Alternate-site kindling (AK), which has been known to induce so-called kindling antagonism, was performed in the bilateral hippocampi to reveal neural mechanisms underlying hippocampal kindling. METHODS: Ten adult rabbits were used. Daily kindling stimulation consisted of a 1- s train of 50 pulses (pulse duration, 1 ms) of 80 to 200 microA (base-to-peak), which was higher than the afterdischarge (AD) threshold. The concurrent alternating stimulations were delivered to the right and left hippocampus once every 24 h. RESULTS: All animals developed a stage 5 convulsion with a mean of 28.1 +/- 3.3 (mean +/- SEM) stimulations. The right and left hippocampus received 14.8 +/- 1.7 and 14.6 +/- 1.6 stimulations, respectively. Behavioral stages induced by stimulation of the right or left hippocampus evolved to generalized seizures along a similar course. Kindling antagonism was not observed. The two sides showed similar increases in AD duration, and similar chronologic changes in interictal discharge (IID) frequency. Simple A-type IID and complex types of IID appeared at higher rates, whereas simple B-type IID remained at a relatively low level. CONCLUSIONS: The present AK procedure did not induce kindling antagonism, but it induced progression of kindling manifestations. The origin of simple B-type IID is known to be in the contralateral side, and its intracellular counterpart corresponds to a sequence of small depolarization followed by large hyperpolarization, suggesting that plastic changes in the feed-forward inhibitory system play an important role in hippocampal kindling.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".