Cholinergic Modulation Differs between Basal and Apical Dendritic Excitation of Hippocampal CA1 Pyramidal Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We hypothesize that endogenous cholinergic modulation of dendritic processing of hippocampal CA1 is layer specific, and it specifically enhances spike output resulting from basal as compared with the apical dendritic excitation. Laminar profiles of evoked field potentials were recorded in the CA1 area of urethane-anesthetized rats using multichannel silicon probes and analyzed as current source density. High-frequency stimulation of the pontis oralis (PnO) attenuated the midapical more than the basal or distal apical dendritic excitatory sink. Population spike (PS) and excitatory sink-PS potentiation resulting from basal dendritic excitation were facilitated, while the PS evoked by apical dendritic stimulation was attenuated by PnO stimulation. Perfusion of cholinergic agonist carbachol onto hippocampal slices in vitro also attenuated the apical more than the basal dendritic excitatory postsynaptic potentials. Excitatory sink attenuation and PS changes after PnO stimulation were blocked by systemic or local scopolamine and by intracerebroventricular (icv) M1 receptor antagonist pirenzepine but not by icv M2 receptor antagonist AFDX-116 or nicotinic antagonists. However, a hippocampal theta rhythm activated by PnO stimulation was blocked by systemic but not by local scopolamine. We conclude that endogenous acetylcholine mediates a stronger presynaptic inhibition of the midapical than basal and distal apical excitation mainly through M1 receptors.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".