The relation between peripheral and central glutamate and glutamine in healthy male volunteers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: High-field strength proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy ((1)H-MRS) and peripheral blood analyses reported in the literature reveal glutamate (Glu) and glutamine (Gln) abnormalities in schizophrenia. Given the relative ease and feasibility of using peripheral measures, the present study investigates the relation between peripheral and brain Glu and Gln levels. METHODS: We recruited healthy volunteers (n = 17, mean age 21.9 [standard deviation 2.9, range 18-29] yr) between May and December 2005. All participants underwent 3 Tesla (1)H-MRS analysis with segmentation (grey matter, white matter, cerebrospinal fluid) at the Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Centre at the University of Alberta Hospital to quantify medial prefrontal cortical (mPFC) Glu and Glx (i.e., combination of Glu and Gln). Within 1 week of (1)H-MRS analysis, we collected plasma from the same participants for Glu and Gln quantification, using high-performance liquid chromatography at the Neurochemical Research Unit at the University of Alberta. RESULTS: There was no correlation between plasma Glu and either medial prefrontal cortical Glu or Glx (R(1,15) = 0.019, p = 0.944 and R(1,15) = 0.081, p = 0.757, respectively). Similarly, there was no correlation between plasma Gln and either mPFC Glu or Glx (R(1,15) = 0.029, p = 0.911 and R(1,15) = 0.025, p = 0.925, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our findings support the use of (1)H-MRS, instead of peripheral blood analysis, for investigating glutamatergic dysfunction in the brain.
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".