Endocannabinoid signaling in hypothalamic circuits regulates arousal from general anesthesia in mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Consciousness can be defined by two major attributes: awareness of environment and self, and arousal, which reflects the level of awareness. The return of arousal after general anesthesia presents an experimental tool for probing the neural mechanisms that control consciousness. Here we have identified that systemic or intracerebral injection of the cannabinoid CB1 receptor (CB1R) antagonist AM281 into the dorsomedial nucleus of the hypothalamus (DMH) - but not the adjacent perifornical area (Pef) or the ventrolateral preoptic nucleus of the hypothalamus (VLPO) - accelerates arousal in mice recovering from general anesthesia. Anesthetics selectively activated endocannabinoid (eCB) signaling at DMH glutamatergic but not GABAergic synapses, leading to suppression of both glutamatergic DMH-Pef and GABAergic DMH-VLPO projections. Deletion of CB1R from widespread cerebral cortical or prefrontal cortical (PFC) glutamatergic neurons, including those innervating the DMH, mimicked the arousal-accelerating effects of AM281. In contrast, CB1R deletion from brain GABAergic neurons or hypothalamic glutamatergic neurons did not affect recovery time from anesthesia. Inactivation of PFC-DMH, DMH-VLPO, or DMH-Pef projections blocked AM281-accelerated arousal, whereas activation of these projections mimicked the effects of AM281. We propose that decreased eCB signaling at glutamatergic terminals of the PFC-DMH projection accelerates arousal from general anesthesia through enhancement of the excitatory DMH-Pef projection, the inhibitory DMH-VLPO projection, or both.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".