Noxious Lingual Stimulation Influences the Excitability of the Face Primary Motor Cerebral Cortex (Face MI) in the Rat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanisms whereby orofacial pain affects motor function are poorly understood. The aims were to determine whether 1) lingual algesic chemical stimulation affected face primary motor cerebral cortex (face MI) excitability defined by intracortical microstimulation (ICMS); and 2) any such effects were limited to the motor efferent MI zones driving muscles in the vicinity of the noxious stimulus. Ketamine-anesthetized Sprague-Dawley male rats were implanted with electromyographic (EMG) electrodes into anterior digastric, masseter, and genioglossus muscles. In 38 rats, three microelectrodes were located in left face MI at ICMS-defined sites for evoking digastric and/or genioglossus responses. ICMS thresholds for evoking EMG activity from each site were determined every 15 min for 1 h, then the right anterior tongue was infused (20 microl, 120 microl/h) with glutamate (1.0 M, n = 18) or isotonic saline (n = 7). Subsequently, ICMS thresholds were determined every 15 min for 4 h. In intact control rats (n = 13), ICMS thresholds were recorded over 5 h. Only left and right genioglossus ICMS thresholds were significantly increased (< or =350%) in the glutamate infusion group compared with intact and isotonic saline groups (P < 0.05). These dramatic effects of glutamate on ICMS-evoked genioglossus activity contrast with its weak effects only on right genioglossus activity evoked from the internal capsule or hypoglossal nucleus. This is the first documentation that intraoral noxious stimulation results in prolonged neuroplastic changes manifested as a decrease in face MI excitability. These changes appear to occur predominantly in those parts of face MI that provide motor output to the orofacial region receiving the noxious stimulation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".