MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2910351681 · doi:10.1101/514414

Afferent connections of the primary somatosensory cortex of the mouse for contextual and multisensory processing

2019· preprint· en· W2910351681 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Massé, Sohen Blanchet-Godbout, Gilles Bronchti, Denis Boire

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensory systemSomatosensory systemNeuroscienceBarrel cortexStimulus modalityContext (archaeology)Sensory processingReceptive fieldCortex (anatomy)PsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sensory information is conveyed from peripheral receptors through specific thalamic relays to primary areas of the cerebral cortex. Information is then routed to specialized areas for the treatment of specific aspects of the sensory signals and to multisensory associative areas. Information processing in primary sensory cortices is influenced by contextual information from top-down projections of multiple cortical motor and associative areas as well as areas of other sensory modalities and higher order thalamic nuclei. The primary sensory cortices are thus located at the interface of the ascending and descending pathways. The theory of predictive coding implies that the primary areas are the site of comparison between the sensory information expected as a function of the context and the sensory information that comes from the environment. To better understand the anatomical basis of this model of sensory systems we have charted the cortical and subcortical afferent inputs in the ipsilateral and contralateral hemispheres of the primary somatosensory cortex of adult C57Bl/6 mice. Iontophoretic injections of the b-fragment of cholera toxin were performed inside the mystacial caudal barrel field, more rostral barrel field and somatosensory cortex outside the barrel field to test the hypothesis that differences exist between these three parts and to compare their projections to the subnetworks built from the Mouse Connectome Project data. The laminar distribution of retrogradely labeled cell bodies was used to classify the projections as feedback, feedforward or lateral. Layer indices range between −1 and 1, indicating feedback and feedforward connections respectively. The primary somatosensory cortex and the barrel field have afferent connections with somatosensory areas, non-somatosensory primary sensory areas, multisensory, motor, associative, and neuromodulatory areas. The caudal part of the barrel field displays different and more abundant cortical and subcortical connections compared to the rest of the primary somatosensory cortex. Layer indices of cortical projections to the primary somatosensory cortex and the barrel field were mainly negative and very similar for ipsilateral and contralateral projections. These data demonstrate that the primary somatosensory cortex receives sensory and non-sensory information from cortical and subcortical sources.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicNeural dynamics and brain function→French-language works237,207→