MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516311894 · doi:10.4236/jbbs.2016.69034

Alterations in Caspase-3 in Juvenile Rats Treated Neonatally with Domoic Acid

2016· article· en· W2516311894 on OpenAlexafffund
Mark Robbins, Catherine L. Ryan, Tracy A. Doucette

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Behavioral and Brain Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDomoic acidPrefrontal cortexJuvenileGlutamate receptorSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)NeuroscienceHippocampusInfralimbic cortexCentral nervous systemInternal medicinePsychologyEndocrinologyToxinBiologyMedicineCognitionPsychiatryBiochemistryReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The clinical presentation of schizophrenia involves a variety of symptoms, which in many cases include hallucinations and delusions. Experimentally revealed alterations in both pre-pulse inhibition (PPI) and latent inhibition (LI) are also apparent in individuals afflicted with this disorder. Many have speculated that altered synaptic connections are, in part, responsible for this subset of behavioral abnormalities. We have previously reported that neonatal chronic low-dose injections of domoic acid (DOM) produce adult rats with deficits in PPI and LI. The current study was conducted to determine whether this toxin-treatment would alter the degree of apoptosis occurring in the developing brain. Results revealed significant decreases in caspase-3 within the right prelimbic cortex (PrL) in both male and female DOM-treated rats suggesting that even modest alterations in glutamate (Glu) signaling during critical periods of central nervous system (CNS) maturation will modify ontogenetic processes in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) of the juvenile rat.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Behavioral and Brain ScienceSame topicNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors StudyFrench-language works237,207