Characteristics of sleep-wake cycles in mice lacking prostanoid DP receptors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To investigate the effect of prostanoid DP receptors (DPR) on sleep-wake regulation in mice. METHODS: Under pentobarbital anesthesia, mice were chronically implanted with electroencephalogram (EEG) and electromyogram (EMG) electrodes for polysomnographic recordings. The spontaneous sleep-wake cycles were monitored continuously by EEG/EMG recording system for 24 h beginning at 800 p.m. and analyzed by SLEEPSIGN software in DPR knock out (KO) and wild type (WT) mice. RESULTS: DPR-KO mice exhibited a similar circadian rhythm of sleep-wake cycles to WT mice. The amounts of rapid eye movement (REM) sleep or non-REM (NREM) sleep during both the light and dark periods were identical between the DPR-KO and WT mice. Whereas, an increase in the episode number of wakefulness and a shortage in the duration of NREM sleep were found in DPR-KO mice during the light period compared with WT mice. Moreover, DPR-KO mice showed lower activity in delta-wave component in NREM sleep and higher activity in theta-wave component in REM sleep than WT mice. CONCLUSION: DPR plays a crucial role in mediating the prostaglandin D_2-induced sleep. Deficiency of DPR results in the low intensity and fragmented diurnal NREM sleep and the high vigilance REM sleep, with the normal circadian rhythm of sleep in mice.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".