Computational modelling of trans-synaptic nanocolumns, a modulator of synaptic transmission
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Nanocolumns are trans-synaptic structures which align presynaptic vesicles release sites and postsynaptic receptors. However, how these nano structures shape synaptic signaling remains little understood. Given the difficulty to probe submicroscopic structures experimentally, computer modelling is a usefull approach to investigate the possible functional impacts of nanocolumns. In our in silico model, as has been experimentally observed, a nanocolumn is characterized by a tight distribution of postsynaptic receptors aligned with the presynaptic vesicle release site and by the presence of trans-synaptic molecules which can modulate neurotransmitter diffusion. We found that nanocolumns can play an important role in reinforcing synaptic current mostly when the presynaptic vesicle contains a small number of neurotransmitters. We also show that synapses with and without nanocolumns could have differentiated responses to spontaneous or evoked events. Our work provides a new methodology to investigate in silico the role of the submicroscopic organization of the synapse. Author summary Neurotransmitter release, diffusion, and binding to postsynaptic receptors are key steps in synaptic transmission. However, the submicroscopic arrangement of receptors and presynaptic sites of neurotransmitter release remains little investigated. Experimental observations revealed the presence of trans-synaptic nanocolumns which span both the pre and post synaptic sites and fine tune the position of the post synaptic receptors. The functional impact of these nanocolumns (i.e. their influence on synaptic current) is both little understood and difficult to investigate experimentally. Here we construct a novel in silico model to investigate the functional impact of nanocolumns and show that they could play a functional role in reinforcing weak synapses.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".