MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3024646814 · doi:10.1101/2020.05.15.098608

Astrocytes close a critical period of motor circuit plasticity

2020· preprint· en· W3024646814 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sarah D. Ackerman, Nelson A. Perez-Catalan, Marc Freeman, Chris Q. Doe

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of GeneticsNational Institutes of HealthALS AssociationHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsNeurosciencePeriod (music)BiologyNeuropilExcitatory postsynaptic potentialDendrite (mathematics)Silent periodNeuroethologySensory systemInhibitory postsynaptic potentialCentral nervous systemTranscranial magnetic stimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Critical periods – brief intervals where neural circuits can be modified by sensory input – are necessary for proper neural circuit assembly. Extended critical periods are associated with neurodevelopmental disorders, including schizophrenia and autism; however, the mechanisms that ensure timely critical period closure remain unknown. Here, we define the extent of a critical period in the developing Drosophila motor circuit, and identify astrocytes as essential for proper critical period termination. During the critical period, decreased activity produces larger motor dendrites with fewer inhibitory inputs; conversely, increased motor neuron activity produces smaller motor dendrites with fewer excitatory inputs. Importantly, activity has little effect on dendrite morphology after critical period closure. Astrocytes invade the neuropil just prior to critical period closure, and astrocyte ablation prolongs the critical period. Finally, we use a genetic screen to identify astrocyte-motor neuron signaling pathways that close the critical period, including Neuroligin-Neurexin signaling. Reduced signaling destabilizes dendritic microtubules, increases dendrite dynamicity, and impairs locomotor behavior, underscoring the importance of critical period closure. Previous work defines astroglia as regulators of plasticity at individual synapses; here, we show that astrocytes also regulate large-scale structural plasticity to motor dendrite, and thus, circuit architecture to ensure proper locomotor behavior.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research→French-language works237,207→