MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2893546427 · doi:10.1002/hipo.23036

Immediate‐early gene <i>Homer1a</i> intranuclear transcription focus intensity as a measure of relative neural activation

2018· article· en· W2893546427 on OpenAlexafffund
Wing Kar Li Witharana, Benjamin J. Clark, Vivek Trivedi, Lilia Mesina, Bruce L. McNaughton

Bibliographic record

VenueHippocampus · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersAlberta InnovatesCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Innovates - Health SolutionsNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsHippocampal formationPopulationTranscription (linguistics)NeuroscienceImmediate early geneNucleusChemistryBiologyGeneGene expressionMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Immediate‐early genes (IEGs) exhibit a rapid, transient transcription response to neuronal activation. Fluorescently labeled mRNA transcripts appear as bright intranuclear transcription foci (INF), which have been used as an all‐or‐nothing indicator of recent neuronal activity; however, it would be useful to know whether INF fluorescence can be used effectively to assess relative activations within a neural population. We quantified the Homer1a ( H1a ) response of hippocampal neurons to systematically varied numbers of exposures to the same places by inducing male Long‐Evans rats to run laps around a track. Previous studies reveal relatively stable firing rates across laps on a familiar track. A strong linear trend ( r 2 &gt; 0.9) in INF intensity was observed between 1 and 25 laps, after which INF intensity declined as a consequence of dispersion related to the greater elapsed time. When the integrated fluorescence of the entire nucleus was considered instead, the linear relationship extended to 50 laps. However, there was only an approximate doubling of H1a detected for this 50‐fold variation in total spiking. Thus, the intranuclear H1a RNA fluorescent signal does provide a relative measure of how many times a set of neurons was activated over a ~10 min period, but the dynamic range and hence signal‐to‐noise ratios are poor. This low dynamic range may reflect previously reported reductions in the IEG response during repeated episodes of behavior over longer time scales. It remains to be determined how well the H1a signal reflects relative firing rates within a population of neurons in response to a single, discrete behavioral event.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.792

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHippocampusSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207