Cholinergic potentiation of visual perception and vision restoration in rodents and humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The cholinergic system is a potent neuromodulator system that plays a critical role in cortical plasticity, attention, and learning. Recently, it was found that boosting this system during perceptual learning robustly enhances sensory perception in rodents. In particular, pairing cholinergic activation with visual stimulation increases neuronal responses, cue detection ability, and long-term facilitation in the primary visual cortex. The mechanisms of cholinergic enhancement are closely linked to attentional processes, long-term potentiation, and modulation of the excitatory/inhibitory balance. Some studies currently examine this effect in humans. OBJECTIVE: The present article reviews the research from our laboratory, examining whether potentiating the central cholinergic system could help visual perception and restoration. METHODS: Electrophysiological or pharmacological enhancement of the cholinergic system are administered during a visual training. Electrophysiological responses and perceptual learning performance are investigated before and after the training in rats and humans. This approach's ability to restore visual capacities following a visual deficit induced by a partial optic nerve crush is also investigated in rats. RESULTS: The coupling of visual training to cholinergic stimulation improved visual discrimination and visual acuity in rats, and improved residual vision after a deficit. These changes were due to muscarinic and nicotinic transmissions and were associated with a functional improvement of evoked potentials. In humans, potentiation of cholinergic transmission with 5 mg of donepezil showed improved learning and ocular dominance plasticity, although this treatment was ineffective in augmenting the perceptual threshold and electroencephalography. CONCLUSIONS: Potential therapeutic outcomes ought to facilitate vision restoration using commercially available cholinergic agents combined with visual stimulation in order to prevent irreversible vision loss in patients. This approach has the potential to help a large population of visually impaired individuals.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".