MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2888653626 · doi:10.1101/397323

A spike-timing-dependent plasticity rule for single, clustered and distributed dendritic spines

2018· preprint· en· W2888653626 on OpenAlexafffund
Sabrina Tazerart, Diana Mitchell, Soledad Miranda‐Rottmann, Roberto Araya

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDendritic spineLong-term potentiationSPINE (molecular biology)NeuroscienceExcitatory postsynaptic potentialPostsynaptic potentialSynaptic plasticityChemistrySpike-timing-dependent plasticityBiophysicsBiologyInhibitory postsynaptic potentialCell biologyReceptorBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Spike-timing-dependent plasticity (STDP) has been extensively studied in cortical pyramidal neurons, however, the precise structural organization of excitatory inputs that supports STDP, as well as the structural, molecular and functional properties of dendritic spines during STDP remain unknown. Here we performed a spine STDP protocol using two-photon glutamate uncaging to mimic presynaptic glutamate release (pre) paired with somatically generated postsynaptic spikes (post). We found that the induction of STDP in single spines follows a classical Hebbian STDP rule, where pre-post pairings at timings that trigger LTP (t-LTP) produce shrinkage of the activated spine neck and a concomitant increase in its synaptic strength; and post-pre pairings that trigger LTD (t-LTD) decrease synaptic strength without affecting the activated spine shape. Furthermore, we tested whether the single spine-Hebbian STDP rule could be affected by the activation of neighboring (clustered) or distant (distributed) spines. Our results show that the induction of t-LTP in two clustered spines (<5 μm apart) enhances LTP through a mechanism dependent on local spine calcium accumulation and actin polymerization-dependent neck shrinkage, whereas t-LTD was disrupted by the activation of two clustered spines but recovered when spines were separated by >40 μm. These results indicate that synaptic cooperativity, induced by the co-activation of only two clustered spines, provides local dendritic depolarization and local calcium signals sufficient to disrupt t-LTD and extend the temporal window for the induction of t-LTP, leading to STDP only encompassing LTP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research→French-language works237,207→