Anatomical characterization of the cannabinoid CB<sub>1</sub> receptor in cell‐type–specific mutant mouse rescue models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Type 1 cannabinoid (CB 1 ) receptors are widely distributed in the brain. Their physiological roles depend on their distribution pattern, which differs remarkably among cell types. Hence, subcellular compartments with little but functionally relevant CB 1 receptors can be overlooked, fostering an incomplete mapping. To overcome this, knockin mice with cell‐type–specific rescue of CB 1 receptors have emerged as excellent tools for investigating CB 1 receptors’ cell‐type–specific localization and sufficient functional role with no bias. However, to know whether these rescue mice maintain endogenous CB 1 receptor expression level, detailed anatomical studies are necessary. The subcellular distribution of hippocampal CB 1 receptors of rescue mice that express the gene exclusively in dorsal telencephalic glutamatergic neurons (Glu‐ CB 1 ‐RS) or GABAergic neurons (GABA‐ CB 1 ‐RS) was studied by immunoelectron microscopy. Results were compared with conditional CB 1 receptor knockout lines. As expected, CB 1 immunoparticles appeared at presynaptic plasmalemma, making asymmetric and symmetric synapses. In the hippocampal CA1 stratum radiatum, the values of the CB 1 receptor‐immunopositive excitatory and inhibitory synapses were Glu‐ CB 1 ‐RS, 21.89% (glutamatergic terminals); 2.38% (GABAergic terminals); GABA‐ CB 1 ‐RS, 1.92% (glutamatergic terminals); 77.92% (GABAergic terminals). The proportion of CB 1 receptor‐immunopositive excitatory and inhibitory synapses in the inner one‐third of the dentate molecular layer was Glu‐ CB 1 ‐RS, 53.19% (glutamatergic terminals); 2.30% (GABAergic terminals); GABA‐ CB 1 ‐RS, 3.19% (glutamatergic terminals); 85.07% (GABAergic terminals). Taken together, Glu‐ CB 1 ‐RS and GABA‐ CB 1 ‐RS mice show the usual CB 1 receptor distribution and expression in hippocampal cell types with specific rescue of the receptor, thus being ideal for in‐depth anatomical and functional investigations of the endocannabinoid system. J. Comp. Neurol. 525:302–318, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".