Low levels of muscarinic M1 receptor–positive neurons in cortical layers III and V in Brodmann areas 9 and 17 from individuals with schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Results of neuroimaging and postmortem studies suggest that people with schizophrenia may have lower levels of muscarinic M1 receptors (CHRM1) in the cortex, but not in the hippocampus or thalamus. Here, we use a novel immunohistochemical approach to better understand the likely cause of these low receptor levels. Methods: We determined the distribution and number of CHRM1-positive (CHRM1+) neurons in the cortex, medial dorsal nucleus of the thalamus and regions of the hippocampus from controls ( n = 12, 12 and 5, respectively) and people with schizophrenia ( n = 24, 24 and 13, respectively). Results: Compared with controls, levels of CHRM1+ neurons in people with schizophrenia were lower on pyramidal cells in layer III of Brodmann areas 9 (−44%) and 17 (−45%), and in layer V in Brodmann areas 9 (−45%) and 17 (−62%). We found no significant differences in the number of CHRM1+ neurons in the medial dorsal nucleus of the thalamus or in the hippocampus. Limitations: Although diagnostic cohort sizes were typical for this type of study, they were relatively small. As well, people with schizophrenia were treated with antipsychotic drugs before death. Conclusion: The loss of CHRM1+ pyramidal cells in the cortex of people with schizophrenia may underpin derangements in the cholinergic regulation of GABAergic activity in cortical layer III and in cortical/subcortical communication via pyramidal cells in layer V.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".