MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169325443 · doi:10.1101/lm.778108

Predator (cat hair)-induced enhancement of hippocampal long-term potentiation in rats: Involvement of acetylcholine

2008· article· en· W2169325443 on OpenAlexafffund
Hans C. Dringenberg, Daniel Pereira de Oliveira, Diala Habib

Bibliographic record

VenueLearning & Memory · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPhilip Morris International
KeywordsLong-term potentiationNeuroscienceHippocampal formationPerforant pathMuscarinic acetylcholine receptorDentate gyrusMemory consolidationStimulationPsychologyAcetylcholineSynaptic plasticityHippocampusChemistryBiologyEndocrinologyReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extensive literature has demonstrated that arousal and fear modify memory acquisition and consolidation. Predator hair and odors increase arousal in rats and, therefore, may influence information encoding and synaptic plasticity in the rodent nervous system. In behavioral experiments, we confirm that laboratory-bred Long Evans rats avoid cat hair. Electrophysiological work in vivo showed that long-term potentiation (LTP) in the dentate gyrus induced by perforant path stimulation was enhanced for 5-7 days when LTP induction occurred in the presence of cat hair relative to fake hair. The muscarinic receptor antagonist scopolamine (i.p.) reversed the cat hair-elicited LTP enhancement without affecting weaker LTP elicited in the presence of fake hair. Thus, exposure to a predator stimulus elicits a cholinergically-dependent state of heightened plasticity that may serve to facilitate information storage in hippocampal circuits.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLearning & MemorySame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207