MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Role of Cholinergic Midbrain Neurons in Startle and Prepulse Inhibition

2018· article· en· W2889246970 on OpenAlexaff
Erin Azzopardi, Andrea Gaile Louttit, Cleusa DeOliveira, Steven R. Laviolette, Susanne Schmid

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCholinergicNeurosciencePedunculopontine Tegmental NucleusPrepulse inhibitionTegmentumCholinergic neuronMidbrainPsychologyStartle responseSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Central nervous systemPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the two major cholinergic centers of the mammalian brain is located in the midbrain, i.e., the pedunculopontine tegmentum (PPTg) and the adjacent laterodorsal tegmentum. These cholinergic neurons have been shown to be important for e.g., arousal, reward associations, and sleep. They also have been suggested to mediate sensorimotor gating, measured as prepulse inhibition of startle (PPI). PPI disruptions are a hallmark of schizophrenia and are observed in various other psychiatric disorders, where they are associated with, and often predictive of, other cognitive symptoms. PPI has been proposed to be mediated by a short midbrain circuitry including inhibitory cholinergic projections from PPTg to the startle pathway. Although the data indicating the involvement of the PPTg is very robust, some more recent evidence challenges that there is a cholinergic contribution to PPI. We here use transient optogenetic activation of specifically the cholinergic PPTg neurons in male and female rats to address their role in startle modulation in general, and in PPI specifically. Although we could confirm the crucial role of PPTg cholinergic neurons in associative reward learning, validating our experimental approach, we found that activation of cholinergic PPTg neurons did not inhibit startle responses. In contrast, activation of cholinergic PPTg neurons enhanced startle, which is in accordance with their general role in arousal and indicate a potential involvement in sensitization of startle. We conclude that noncholinergic PPTg neurons mediate PPI in contrast to the longstanding hypothetical view that PPI is mediated by cholinergic PPTg neurons. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENTActivation of cholinergic neurons in the midbrain has been assumed to mediate prepulse inhibition of startle (PPI), a common measure of sensorimotor gating that is disrupted in schizophrenia and other psychiatric disorders. We here revisit this long-standing hypothesis using optogenetic activation of these specific neurons combined with startle testing in rats. In contrast to the hypothetical role of these neurons in startle modulation, we show that their activation leads to an increase of baseline startle and to prepulse facilitation. This supports recent data by others that have started to cast some doubt on the cholinergic hypothesis of PPI, and calls for a revision of the theoretical construct of PPI mechanisms.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 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

Citations65
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207