MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2322590601 · doi:10.1080/19336950.2016.1161988

Assessing the role of IKCa channels in generating the sAHP of CA1 hippocampal pyramidal cells

2016· article· en· W2322590601 on OpenAlexafffund
Ray W. Turner, Hadhimulya Asmara, Jordan D. T. Engbers, Jason Miclat, Arsalan P. Rizwan, Giriraj Sahu, Gerald W. Zamponi

Bibliographic record

VenueChannels · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsHippocampal formationBiophysicsNeuroscienceChemistryIberiotoxinAfterhyperpolarizationGatingPatch clampPotassium channelCell biologyBiologyElectrophysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our previous work reported that KCa3.1 (IKCa) channels are expressed in CA1 hippocampal pyramidal cells and contribute to the slow afterhyperpolarization that regulates spike accommodation in these cells. The current report presents data from single cell RT-PCR that further reveals mRNA in CA1 cells that corresponds to the sequence of an IKCa channel from transmembrane segments 5 through 6 including the pore region, revealing the established binding sites for 4 different IKCa channel blockers. A comparison of methods to internally apply the IKCa channel blocker TRAM-34 shows that including the drug in an electrode from the onset of an experiment is unviable given the speed of drug action upon gaining access for whole-cell recordings. Together the data firmly establish IKCa channel expression in CA1 neurons and clarify methodological requirements to obtain a block of IKCa channel activity through internal application of TRAM-34.

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)0.001
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations33
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChannelsSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207