Motoneurone synchronization for intercostal and abdominal muscles: interneurone influences in two different species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The contribution of branched-axon monosynaptic inputs in the generation of short-term synchronization of motoneurones remains uncertain. Here, synchronization was measured for intercostal and abdominal motoneurones supplying the lower thorax and upper abdomen, mostly showing expiratory discharges. Synchronization in the anaesthetized cat, where the motoneurones receive a strong direct descending drive, is compared with that in anaesthetized or decerebrate rats, where the direct descending drive is much weaker. In the cat, some examples could be explained by branched-axon monosynaptic inputs, but many others could not, by virtue of peaks in cross-correlation histograms whose widths (relatively wide) and timing indicated common inputs with more complex linkages, e.g., disynaptic excitatory. In contrast, in the rat, correlations for pairs of internal intercostal nerves were dominated by very narrow peaks, indicative of branched-axon monosynaptic inputs. However, the presence of activity in both inspiration and expiration in many of the nerves allowed additional synchronization measurements between internal and external intercostal nerves. Time courses of synchronization for these often consisted of combinations of peaks and troughs, which have never been previously described for motoneurone synchronization and which we interpret as indicating combinations of inputs, excitation of one group of motoneurones being common with either excitation or inhibition of the other. Significant species differences in the circuits controlling the motoneurones are indicated, but in both cases, the roles of spinal interneurones are emphasised. The results demonstrate the potential of motoneurone synchronization for investigating inhibition and have important general implications for the interpretation of neural connectivity measurements by cross-correlation.
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".