Activation of Embryonic Red and White Muscle Fibers During Fictive Swimming in the Developing Zebrafish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sub-threshold, motoneuron-evoked synaptic activity was observed in zebrafish embryonic red (ER) and white (EW) muscle fibers paralyzed with a dose of D-tubocurarine insufficient to abolish synaptic activity to determine whether muscle activation was coordinated to produce the undulating body movements required for locomotion. Paired whole-cell recordings revealed a synaptic drive that alternated between ipsilateral and contralateral myotomes and exhibited a rostral-caudal delay in timing appropriate for swimming. Both ER and EW muscle were activated during fictive swimming. However, at the fastest fictive swimming rates, ER fibers were de-recruited, whereas they could be active in isolation of EW fibers at the slowest fictive swimming rates. Prior to hatching, fictive swimming was preceded by a lower frequency, more robust and rhythmic synaptic drive resembling the "coiling" behavior of fish embryos. The motor activity observed in paralyzed zebrafish closely resembled the swimming and coiling behaviors observed in these developing fishes. At the early developmental stages examined in this study, myotomal muscle recruitment and coordination were similar to that observed in adult fishes during swimming. Our results indicate that the patterned activation of myotomal muscle is set from the onset of development.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".