MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

NF1 dissociates cell type specific contributions toward reward valuation and motor control

2019· article· en· W3177290310 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Laurie P. Sutton, Maria Dao, Muntean Brian, Kirill A. Martemyanov

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedium spiny neuronRegulatorRegulator of G protein signalingNeuroscienceNeurofibromin 1G protein-coupled receptorBiologyCell typeStriatumSignal transductionNeurofibromatosisCell biologyG proteinCellGeneGeneticsDopamineGTPase-activating protein

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurofibromin 1 (NF1) is a large multidomain signaling molecule that is a major Ras regulator but also acts as a positive regulator of cAMP levels by mediating G protein‐coupled receptor (GPCR)‐dependent activation of adenylate cyclase. Mutations in the NF1 gene cause Neurofibromatosis type 1, a genetic disorder characterized by multiple benign and malignant tumors with prominent neuropsychiatric symptoms that include learning and attention deficits, as well as motor impairments. Recently, we found that NF1 is a direct effector of GPCR signaling via Gβγ subunits in the striatum. However, it remains unclear the signaling contribution of NF1 in striatal‐mediator behaviors. Here we demonstrate the impact of intracellular signaling pathways commonly targeted by neurotransmitter inputs that impact medium spiny neurons (MSN) activity can be dissociated in a cell‐specific manner with distinct contribution to motor learning and reward‐related behaviors. We genetically ablated NF1 with cellular resolution demonstrating the diverging behavioral and signaling specific manner in which NF1 contributes to the acquisition and consolidating of learning a motor skill, as well as its regulation of morphine reward. Support or Funding Information This work was supported by the NIH and by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Fellowship. This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling→French-language works237,207→