Orexin and MCH neurons express c‐Fos differently after sleep deprivation vs. recovery and bear different adrenergic receptors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Though overlapping in distribution within the posterior hypothalamus, neurons containing orexin (Orx) and melanin concentrating hormone (MCH) may play different roles in the regulation of behavioural state. In the present study in rats, we tested whether they express c-Fos differently after total sleep deprivation (SD) vs. sleep recovery (SR). Whereas c-Fos expression was increased in Orx neurons after SD, it was increased in MCH neurons after SR. We reasoned that Orx and MCH neurons could be differently modulated by noradrenaline (NA) and accordingly bear different adrenergic receptors (ARs). Of all Orx neurons (estimated at approximately 6700), substantial numbers were immunostained for the alpha1A-AR, including cells expressing c-Fos after SD. Yet, substantial numbers were also immunostained for the alpha2A-AR, also including cells expressing c-Fos after SD. Of all MCH neurons (estimated at approximately 12,300), rare neurons were immunostained for the alpha1A-AR, whereas significant numbers were immunostained for the alpha2A-AR, including cells expressing c-Fos after SR. We conclude that Orx neurons may act to sustain waking during sleep deprivation, whereas MCH neurons may act to promote sleep following sustained waking. Some Orx neurons would participate in the maintenance of waking during deprivation when excited by NA through alpha1-ARs, whereas MCH neurons would participate in sleep recovery after deprivation when released from inhibition by NA through alpha2-ARs. On the other hand, under certain conditions, Orx neurons may also be submitted to an inhibitory influence by NA through alpha2-ARs.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".