MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080168504 · doi:10.3390/ijms21176197

The Role of Amino Acids in Neurotransmission and Fluorescent Tools for Their Detection

2020· review· en· W3080168504 on OpenAlexafffund
Rochelin Dalangin, Anna Kim, Robert E. Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsNeurotransmissionAmino acidFluorescenceInformation transmissionComputational biologyNeuroscienceAlanineNanotechnologyBiologyChemistryBiochemistryBiophysicsComputer scienceMaterials sciencePhysicsReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurotransmission between neurons, which can occur over the span of a few milliseconds, relies on the controlled release of small molecule neurotransmitters, many of which are amino acids. Fluorescence imaging provides the necessary speed to follow these events and has emerged as a powerful technique for investigating neurotransmission. In this review, we highlight some of the roles of the 20 canonical amino acids, GABA and β-alanine in neurotransmission. We also discuss available fluorescence-based probes for amino acids that have been shown to be compatible for live cell imaging, namely those based on synthetic dyes, nanostructures (quantum dots and nanotubes), and genetically encoded components. We aim to provide tool developers with information that may guide future engineering efforts and tool users with information regarding existing indicators to facilitate studies of amino acid dynamics.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations195
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular SciencesSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207