Development of human visual cortex: A balance between excitatory and inhibitory plasticity mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Formation of neural circuitry in the developing visual cortex is shaped by experience during the critical period. A number of mechanisms, including N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor activation and gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)-mediated inhibition, are crucial in determining onset and closure of the critical period for visual plasticity. Animal models have shown that a threshold level of tonic inhibition must be reached for critical period plasticity to occur and that NMDA receptors contribute to Hebbian synaptic plasticity in the developing visual cortex. There are a number of developmental changes in these glutamatergic and GABAergic mechanisms that have been linked to plasticity; however, those changes have been shown only in animal models, and their development in the human visual cortex is not known. We have addressed this question by studying the expression of the major glutamatergic receptors, GABA(A) receptors, and glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) isoforms during the first 6 years of postnatal development of human visual cortex. There are significant changes in the expression of these proteins during postnatal development of human visual cortex. The time course of the changes is quite prolonged and suggests that it may set the pace for the prolonged critical period in human visual development. The changes also affect the nature of spatial and temporal integration in visual cortical neurons and thereby contribute to the maturation of visual functions.
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 | 0.000 | 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".