MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804485648 · doi:10.1523/eneuro.0013-18.2018

Serotonin Selectively Increases Detectability of Motion Stimuli in the Electrosensory System

2018· article· en· W2804485648 on OpenAlexafffund
Mariana M. Márquez, Maurice J. Chacron

Bibliographic record

VenueeNeuro · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicOlfactory and Sensory Function Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGovernment of Canada
KeywordsNeuroscienceSerotoninCommunicationPsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Serotonergic innervation of sensory areas is found ubiquitously across the central nervous system of vertebrates. Here, we used a system’s level approach to investigate the role of serotonin on processing motion stimuli in the electrosensory system of the weakly electric fish Apteronotus albifrons . We found that exogenous serotonin application increased the firing activity of pyramidal neural responses to both looming and receding motion. Separating spikes belonging to bursts from those that were isolated revealed that this effect was primarily due to increased burst firing. Moreover, when investigating whether firing activity during stimulation could be discriminated from baseline (i.e., in the absence of stimulation), we found that serotonin increased stimulus discriminability only for some stimuli. This is because increased burst firing was most prominent for these. Further, the effects of serotonin were highly heterogeneous, with some neurons displaying large while others instead displaying minimal changes in responsiveness following serotonin application. Further analysis revealed that serotonin application had the greatest effect on neurons with low baseline firing rates and little to no effect on neurons with high baseline firing rates. Finally, the effects of serotonin on sensory neuron responses were largely independent of object velocity. Our results therefore reveal a novel function for the serotonergic system in selectively enhancing discriminability for motion stimuli.

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)0.001
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 score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeNeuroSame topicOlfactory and Sensory Function StudiesFrench-language works237,207