MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2413187257 · doi:10.1152/jn.2001.85.4.1595

Inactivation of Voltage-Activated Na<sup>+</sup>Currents Contributes to Different Adaptation Properties of Paired Mechanosensory Neurons

2001· article· en· W2413187257 on OpenAlexaff
Päivi H. Torkkeli, Shin‐ichi Sekizawa, Andrew S. French

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuronDepolarizationStimulus (psychology)BiophysicsElectrophysiologyNeuroscienceChemistrySodiumBiologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Voltage-activated sodium current (I(Na)) is primarily responsible for the leading edge of the action potential in many neurons. While I(Na) generally activates rapidly when a neuron is depolarized, its inactivation properties differ significantly between different neurons and even within one neuron, where I(Na) often has slowly and rapidly inactivating components. I(Na) inactivation has been suggested to regulate action potential firing frequency in some cells, but no clear picture of this relationship has emerged. We studied I(Na) in both members of the paired mechanosensory neurons of a spider slit-sense organ, where one neuron adapts rapidly (type A) and the other slowly (type B) in response to a step depolarization. In both neuron types I(Na) activated and inactivated with single time constants of 2--3 ms and 5--10 ms, respectively, varying with the stimulus intensity. However, there was a clear difference in the steady-state inactivation properties of the two neuron types, with the half-maximal inactivation (V(50)) being -40.1 mV in type A neurons and -58.1 mV in type B neurons. Therefore I(Na) inactivated closer to the resting potential in the more slowly adapting neurons. I(Na) also recovered from inactivation significantly faster in type B than type A neurons, and the recovery was dependent on conditioning voltage. These results suggest that while the rate of I(Na) inactivation is not responsible for the difference in the adaptation behavior of these two neuron types, the rate of recovery from inactivation may play a major role. Inactivation at lower potentials could therefore be crucial for more rapid recovery.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations28
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207