Ion Channels and Electrophysiological Properties of Astrocytes: Implications for Emergent Stimulation Technologies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Astrocytes comprise a heterogeneous cell population characterized by distinct morphologies, protein expression and function. Unlike neurons, astrocytes do not generate action potentials, however, they are electrically dynamic cells with extensive electrophysiological heterogeneity and diversity. Astrocytes are hyperpolarized cells with low membrane resistance. They are heavily involved in the modulation of K+ and express an array of different voltage-dependent and voltage-independent channels to help with this ion regulation. In addition to these K+ channels, astrocytes also express several different types of Na+ channels; intracellular Na+ signaling in astrocytes has been linked to some of their functional properties. The physiological hallmark of astrocytes is their extensive intracellular Ca2+ signaling cascades, which vary at the regional, subregional, and cellular levels. In this review article, we highlight the physiological properties of astrocytes and the implications for their function and influence of network and synaptic activity. Furthermore, we discuss the implications of these differences in the context of optogenetic and DREADD experiments and consider whether these tools represent physiologically relevant techniques for the interrogation of astrocyte function.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
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".