MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3166132153 · doi:10.1101/2021.06.13.448213

Optogenetic stimulation of glutamatergic neurons in the cuneiform nucleus controls locomotor movements in a mouse model of Parkinson’s disease

2021· preprint· en· W3166132153 on OpenAlexafffund
Maxime Fougère, Cornelis Immanuel van der Zouwen, Joël Boutin, Kloé Neszvecsko, Philippe Sarret, Dimitri Ryczko

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics research
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsOptogeneticsNeuroscienceGlutamatergicDeep brain stimulationPedunculopontine nucleusParkinson's diseaseStimulationDopaminergicMidbrainPremovement neuronal activitySubthalamic nucleusBiologyDopamineMedicineCentral nervous systemGlutamate receptorDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT In Parkinson’s disease ( PD ), the loss of midbrain dopaminergic cells results in severe locomotor deficits such a gait freezing and akinesia. Growing evidence indicates that these deficits can be attributed to decreased activity in the Mesencephalic Locomotor Region ( MLR ), a brainstem region controlling locomotion. Clinicians are exploring deep brain stimulation of the MLR as a treatment option to improve locomotor function. The results are variable, from modest to promising. However, within the MLR, clinicians have targeted the pedunculopontine nucleus exclusively, while leaving the cuneiform nucleus unexplored. To our knowledge, the effects of cuneiform nucleus stimulation have never been determined in parkinsonian conditions in any animal model. Here, we addressed this issue in a mouse model of Parkinson’s disease based on bilateral striatal injection of 6-hydroxydopamine ( 6-OHDA ), which damaged the nigrostriatal pathway and decreased locomotor activity. We show that selective optogenetic stimulation of glutamatergic neurons in the cuneiform nucleus in mice expressing channelrhodopsin in a Cre-dependent manner in Vglut2-positive neurons ( Vglut2-ChR2-EYFP mice ) increased the number of locomotor initiations, increased the time spent in locomotion, and controlled locomotor speed. Using deep learning-based movement analysis, we found that limb kinematics of optogenetic-evoked locomotion in pathological conditions were largely similar to those recorded in freely moving animals. Our work identifies the glutamatergic neurons of the cuneiform nucleus as a potentially clinically relevant target to improve locomotor activity in parkinsonian conditions. Our study should open new avenues to develop targeted stimulation of these neurons using deep brain stimulation, pharmacotherapy or optogenetics. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT In Parkinson’s disease, alleviating locomotor deficits is a challenge. Clinicians are exploring deep brain stimulation of the Mesencephalic Locomotor Region, a brainstem region controlling locomotion, but results are mixed. However, the best target in this region in Parkinson’s disease remains unknown. Indeed, this region which comprises the pedunculopontine and cuneiform nuclei, contains different cell types with opposing effects on locomotor output. Here, using a mouse model where midbrain dopaminergic cells were damaged by a neurotoxin, we demonstrate that optogenetic activation of glutamatergic neurons in the cuneiform nucleus increases locomotion, controls speed, and evokes limb movements similar to those observed during spontaneous locomotion in intact animals. Our study identifies a potentially clinically relevant target to improve locomotor function in Parkinson’s disease.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics researchFrench-language works237,207