Tuning in the Hippocampal Theta Band <em>In Vitro</em>: Methodologies for Recording from the Isolated Rodent Septohippocampal Circuit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This protocol outlines the procedures for preparing and recording from the isolated whole hippocampus, of WT and transgenic mice, along with recent improvements in methodologies and applications for the study of theta oscillations. A simple characterization of the isolated hippocampal preparation is presented whereby the relationship between internal hippocampal theta oscillators is examined together with the activity of pyramidal cells, and GABAergic interneurons, of the cornu ammonis-1 (CA1) and subiculum (SUB) areas. Overall, we show that the isolated hippocampus is capable of generating intrinsic theta oscillations in vitro and that rhythmicity generated within the hippocampus can be precisely manipulated by optogenetic stimulation of parvalbumin-positive (PV) interneurons. The in vitro isolated hippocampal preparation offers a unique opportunity to use simultaneous field and intracellular patch-clamp recordings from visually-identified neurons to better understand the mechanisms underlying theta rhythm generation.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".