MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Synaptic Activity Controls Dendritic Spine Morphology by Modulating eEF2-Dependent BDNF Synthesis

2010· article· en· W2145493769 on OpenAlexaff
Chiara Verpelli, Giovanni Piccoli, Cristina Zibetti, Alice Zanchi, Fabrizio Gardoni, Kun Huang, Dario Brambilla, Mónica Di Luca, Elena Battaglioli, Carlo Sala

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersConsiglio Nazionale delle RicercheCompagnia di San PaoloFondazione CariploGiovanni Armenise-Harvard Foundation
KeywordsDendritic spineGene knockdownSynaptic plasticityCell biologyDendritic filopodiaTranslation (biology)ChemistryBiologyNeuroscienceHippocampal formationMessenger RNAReceptorBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Activity-dependent changes in synaptic structure and spine morphology are required for learning and memory, and depend on protein translation. We show that the kinase for eukaryotic elongation factor 2 (eEF2K) regulates dendritic spine stability and synaptic structure by modulating activity-dependent dendritic BDNF synthesis. Specifically RNAi knockdown of eEF2K reduces dendritic spine stability and inhibits dendritic BDNF protein expression; whereas overexpression of a constitutively activated eEF2K induces spine maturation and increases expression of dendritic BDNF. Furthermore, BDNF overexpression rescues the spine stability reduced by RNAi knockdown of eEF2K. We also show that synaptic activity-dependent spine maturation and dendritic BDNF protein expression depend on mGluR/EF2K-induced eEF2 phosphorylation. We propose that the eEF2K/eEF2 pathway is a key biochemical sensor that couple neuronal activity to spine plasticity, by controlling the dendritic translation of BDNF.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations159
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207