Phasic modulation of hippocampal synaptic plasticity by theta rhythm.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theta rhythm and long-term potentiation (LTP) are 2 remarkable discoveries. The theta rhythm is an oscillatory neural activity of 3-10 Hz in the hippocampus. LTP is implicated as a cellular basis of memory, but the function of theta oscillation in memory is not clear. This review suggests that theta rhythm bestows optimal conditions for hippocampal LTP and memory encoding. Theta rhythm in hippocampal CA1 is generated mainly by 2 oscillating dipoles-somatic-inhibition and phase-shifted, distal dendritic excitation, with a smaller contribution by rhythmic proximal (CA3) excitation and distal inhibition. Our recent study showed that LTP of the excitatory synapses on the basal or apical dendrites of CA1 pyramidal cells peaked twice in a theta cycle, at the rising (R) and the midcycle (M) phase of the theta rhythm recorded at the distal apical dendrites. In contrast, evoked population spike excitability peaked at a single phase near the midcycle. We infer that R and M peaks of LTP correspond to maximal dendritic depolarization and maximal somatic depolarization of CA1 pyramidal cells, respectively. A ∼50° phase shift between LTP-versus-theta-phase functions suggests independent LTP at the basal and apical dendrites. It is argued that theta phase-dependent LTP occurs under physiological conditions, by pairing presynaptic activity with oscillating postsynaptic depolarization. Place cells, showing intrinsic membrane potential oscillations, are ideal LTP participants. It is suggested that theta phase-dependent LTP contributes to memory encoding, and disruption of either theta oscillation or LTP may disrupt memory in various neurological disorders, including epilepsy and Alzheimer's disease. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".