Scavenging of reactive oxygen species mimics the anoxic response in goldfish pyramidal neurons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Goldfish are one of a few species able to avoid cellular damage during month-long periods in severely hypoxic environments. By suppressing action potentials in excitatory glutamatergic neurons, the goldfish brain decreases its overall energy expenditure. Coincident with reductions in O2 availability is a natural decrease in cellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation, which has been proposed to function as part of a low-oxygen signal transduction pathway. Using live-tissue fluorescence microscopy, we found that ROS production decreased by 10% with the onset of anoxia in goldfish telencephalic brain slices. Employing whole-cell patch-clamp recording, we found that, similar to severe hypoxia, the ROS scavengers N-acetyl cysteine (NAC) and MitoTEMPO, added during normoxic periods, depolarized membrane potential (severe hypoxia -73.6 to -61.4 mV, NAC -76.6 to -66.2 mV and MitoTEMPO -71.5 mV to -62.5 mV) and increased whole-cell conductance (severe hypoxia 5.7 nS to 8.0 nS, NAC 6.0 nS to 7.5 nS and MitoTEMPO 6.0 nS to 7.6 nS). Also, in a subset of active pyramidal neurons, these treatments reduced action potential firing frequency (severe hypoxia 0.18 Hz to 0.03 Hz, NAC 0.27 Hz to 0.06 Hz and MitoTEMPO 0.35 Hz to 0.08 Hz). Neither severe hypoxia nor ROS scavenging impacted action potential threshold. The addition of exogenous hydrogen peroxide could reverse the effects of the antioxidants. Taken together, this supports a role for a reduction in [ROS] as a low-oxygen signal in goldfish brain.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".