MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161121366 · doi:10.2174/157015909788848893

Towards a Reconceptualization of Striatal Interactions Between Glutamatergic and Dopaminergic Neurotransmission and Their Contribution to the Production of Movements

2009· article· en· W2161121366 on OpenAlexaff
Hélène David

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Neuropharmacology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsVertex Pharmaceuticals (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlutamatergicNeuroscienceDopaminergicNeurotransmissionDopamineGlutamate receptorBasal gangliaInhibitory postsynaptic potentialPsychologyMedicineCentral nervous systemInternal medicineReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the current model of the basal ganglia organization, simultaneous activation of the striato-nigral direct pathway by glutamatergic and dopaminergic neurotransmission should lead to a synergistic facilitatory action on locomotor activity, while in contrast activation of the indirect pathway by these two neurotransmittions should lead to antagonistic effects on locomotor activity. Based on published data, as a break with the current thinking, we propose a reconceptualization of functional interactions between dopaminergic and glutamatergic neurotransmission. In this model, dopaminergic neurotransmission is seen as a motor pacemaker responsible for the basal and primary activation of striatal output neurons and glutamate as a driver providing a multiple combination of tonic, phasic, facilitatory and inhibitory influxes resulting from the processing of environmental, emotional and mnesic stimuli. Thus, in the model, glutamate-coded inputs would allow tuning the intrinsic motor-activating properties of dopamine to adjust the production of locomotor activity into goal-oriented movements.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent NeuropharmacologySame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207