MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953208766 · doi:10.1101/230235

Methods for chair restraint and training of the common marmoset on oculomotor tasks

2017· preprint· en· W2953208766 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Johnston, Kevin Barker, Lauren K Hayrynen Schaeffer, David J. Schaeffer, Stefan Everling

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarmosetCallithrixNeuroscienceMacaqueSaccadeEye movementSaccadic maskingFixation (population genetics)PrimateFrontal eye fieldsPsychologyOptogeneticsSuperior colliculusComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The oculomotor system is the most thoroughly understood sensorimotor system in the brain, due in large part to electrophysiological studies carried out in macaque monkeys trained to perform ocuolomotor tasks. A disadvantage of the macaque model is that many cortical oculomotor areas of interest lie within sulci, making high-density array and laminar recordings impractical. Further, many techniques of molecular biology developed in rodents, such as transgenic animals and optogenetic manipulation of neuronal subtypes, are limited in this species. The common marmoset ( Callithrix jacchus ) may potentially bridge the gap between systems neuroscience in macaques and molecular techniques, and additionally possesses a smooth cortex allowing easy access to frontoparietal oculomotor areas. To date, techniques for restraint and training of these animals to perform oculomotor tasks remain in an early stage of development. Here we provide details of a custom-designed chair for restraint of marmosets, a combination head restraint/recording chamber providing stability suitable for eye movement and neural recordings, and a training protocol for oculomotor tasks. As proof-of-principle, we report the results of a psychophysical study in marmosets trained to perform a saccade task using these methods, showing that, as in rhesus and humans, marmosets exhibit a “gap effect” – a decrease in reaction time when the fixation stimulus is removed prior to the onset of a visual saccade target. These results provide evidence that the common marmoset is a suitable model for neurophysiogical investigations of oculomotor control. NEW AND NOTEWORTHY The ability to carry out neuronal recordings in behaving primates has provided a wealth of information regarding the neural circuits underlying the control of eye movements. Such studies require restraint of the animal within a primate chair, head fixation, methods of acclimating the animals to this restraint, and the use of operant conditioning methods for training on oculomotor tasks. In contrast to the macaque model, relatively few studies have reported in detail methods for use in the common marmoset. Here we detail custom-designed equipment and methods by which we have used to successfully train head-restrained marmosets to perform basic oculomotor tasks.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.251 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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