Response of Vestibular-Nerve Afferents to Active and Passive Rotations Under Normal Conditions and After Unilateral Labyrinthectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the possible contribution of signals carried by vestibular-nerve afferents to long-term processes of vestibular compensation after unilateral labyrinthectomy. Semicircular canal afferents were recorded from the contralesional nerve in three macaque monkeys before [horizontal (HC) = 67, anterior (AC) = 66, posterior (PC) = 50] and 1-12 mo after (HC = 192, AC = 86, PC = 57) lesion. Vestibular responses were evaluated using passive sinusoidal rotations with frequencies of 0.5-15 Hz (20-80 degrees /s) and fast whole-body rotations reaching velocities of 500 degrees /s. Sensitivities to nonvestibular inputs were tested by: 1) comparing responses during active and passive head movements, 2) rotating the body with the head held stationary to activate neck proprioceptors, and 3) encouraging head-restrained animals to attempt to make head movements that resulted in the production of neck torques of < or =2 Nm. Mean resting discharge rate before and after the lesion did not differ for the regular, D (dimorphic)-irregular, or C (calyx)-irregular afferents. In response to passive rotations, afferents showed no change in sensitivity and phase, inhibitory cutoff, and excitatory saturation after unilateral labyrinthectomy. Moreover, head sensitivities were similar during voluntary and passive head rotations and responses were not altered by neck proprioceptive or efference copy signals before or after the lesion. The only significant change was an increase in the proportion of C-irregular units postlesion, accompanied by a decrease in the proportion of regular afferents. Taken together, our findings show that changes in response properties of the vestibular afferent population are not likely to play a major role in the long-term changes associated with compensation after unilateral labyrinthectomy.
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".