MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005140116 · doi:10.1016/j.conb.2019.12.004

Food, microbes, sex and old age: on the plasticity of gastrointestinal innervation

2020· review· en· W3005140116 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tomotsune Ameku, Hannah Beckwith, Laura Blackie, Irene Miguel‐Aliaga

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Neurobiology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilEuropean Research CouncilMedical Research Council Canada
KeywordsGastrointestinal tractBiologyEnteric nervous systemNeuroscienceDrosophila melanogasterCrosstalkNervous systemMotilityCentral nervous systemOrganismPlasticityGut–brain axisNeuroplasticityPhysiologyGut floraImmunologyCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The gastrointestinal tract is innervated by its own enteric nervous system and by extrinsic neurons that connect it with the central nervous system. Innervation allows the gastrointestinal tract to sense and respond to diverse stimuli, adjusting motility and secretion, but also affecting our physiology, behaviour and immunity. The mechanisms underlying the formation of gastrointestinal neurons are beginning to be elucidated; those that keep them plastic over an organism's lifetime remain to be explored. Here, we review the effects of microbiota, nutrients, sex and ageing on the morphology and function of gastrointestinal innervation in mammals, and discuss how this plasticity shapes gut-brain crosstalk and whole-body physiology. We also highlight insights gained by nascent studies of the enteric innervation of Drosophila melanogaster.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in NeurobiologySame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207