Blocked Gap Junctional Coupling Increases Glutamate-Induced Neurotoxicity in Neuron-Astrocyte Co-Cultures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gap junctional communication is likely one means by which neurons can endure glutamate cytotoxicity associated with CNS insults (i.e. ischemia). To examine this neuroprotective role of gap junctions, we employed gap junctional blockers to neuronal and astrocytic co-cultures during exposure to a high concentration of extracellular glutamate. Co-cultures were treated with the blocking agents carbenoxolone (CBX; 25 microM), 18alpha-glycyrrhetinic acid (AGA; 10 microM), vehicle or the inactive blocking analogue glycyrrhizic acid (GZA; 25 microM). Twenty-four hours following the insult, cell mortality was analyzed and quantified by the release of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) into the media, the cells' inability to exclude propidium iodide, and terminal dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL). Measurement of LDH release revealed that the glutamate insult was detrimental to the co-cultures when gap junctions were blocked with CBX and AGA. Based on propidium iodide and TUNEL labeling, the glutamate insult caused significant cell death compared to sham vehicle and mortality was amplified in the presence of CBX and AGA. Since blockers were not themselves toxic and did not affect astrocytic uptake of glutamate, it is likely that blocked gap junctions lead to the increased glutamate cytotoxicity. These findings support the hypothesis that gap junctions play a neuroprotective role against glutamate cytotoxicity.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
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.
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".