Deficits in coordinated neuronal activity and network topology are striatal hallmarks in Huntington’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Network alterations underlying neurodegenerative diseases often precede symptoms and functional deficits. Thus, their early identification is central for improved prognosis. In Huntington’s disease (HD), the cortico-striatal networks, involved in motor function processing, are the most compromised neural substrate. However, whether the network alterations are intrinsic of the striatum or the cortex is not fully understood. Results In order to identify early HD neural deficits, we characterized neuronal ensemble calcium activity and network topology of HD striatal and cortical cultures. We used large-scale calcium imaging combined with activity-based network inference analysis. We extracted collective activity events and inferred the topology of the neuronal network in cortical and striatal primary cultures from wild-type and R6/1 mouse model of HD. Striatal, but not cortical, HD networks displayed lower activity and a lessened ability to integrate information. GABAA receptor blockade in healthy and HD striatal cultures generated similar coordinated ensemble activity and network topology, highlighting that the excitatory component of striatal system is spared in HD. Conversely, NMDA receptor activation increased individual neuronal activity while coordinated activity became highly variable and undefined. Interestingly, by boosting NMDA activity, we rectified striatal HD network alterations. Conclusions Overall, our integrative approach highlights striatal defective network integration capacity as a major contributor of basal ganglia dysfunction in HD and suggests that increased excitatory drive may serve as a potential intervention. In addition, our work provides a valuable tool to evaluate in vitro network recovery after treatment intervention in basal ganglia disorders.
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 | 0.000 |
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".