Dopaminergic neurons establish a distinctive axonal arbor with a majority of non‐synaptic terminals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Chemical neurotransmission typically occurs through synapses. Previous ultrastructural examinations of monoamine neuron axon terminals often failed to identify a pre‐ and postsynaptic coupling, leading to the concept of “volume” transmission. Whether this results from intrinsic properties of these neurons remains undefined. We find that dopaminergic neurons in vitro establish a distinctive axonal arbor compared to glutamatergic or GABAergic neurons in both size and propensity of terminals to avoid direct contact with target neurons. While most dopaminergic varicosities are active and contain exocytosis proteins like synaptotagmin 1, only ~20% of these are synaptic. The active zone protein bassoon was found to be enriched in dopaminergic terminals that are in proximity to a target cell. Finally, we found that the proteins neurexin‐1α SS4− and neuroligin‐1 A+B play a critical role in the formation of synapses by dopamine (DA) neurons. Our findings suggest that DA neurons are endowed with a distinctive developmental connectivity program.
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".