Extrasynaptic signaling enables an asymmetric juvenile motor circuit to produce a symmetric undulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary In many animals, there is a direct correspondence between the motor patterns that drive locomotion and the motor neuron innervation onto the muscle groups. For example, the adult C. elegans moves with symmetric and alternating dorsal-ventral bending waves arising from symmetric motor neuron input onto the dorsal and ventral muscles. In contrast to the adult, the C. elegans motor circuit at the juvenile larval stage has asymmetric wiring between motor neurons and muscles, but still generates adult-like bending waves with dorsal-ventral symmetry. We show that in the juvenile circuit, wiring between excitatory and inhibitory motor neurons coordinates the contraction of dorsal muscles with relaxation of ventral muscles, producing dorsal bends. However, ventral bending is not driven by analogous wiring. Instead, ventral muscles are excited uniformly by premotor interneurons through extrasynaptic signaling. Ventral bends occur in anti-phasic entrainment to activity of the same motor neurons that drive dorsal bends. During maturation, the juvenile motor circuit is replaced by two motor subcircuits that separately drive dorsal and ventral bending. Modeling reveals that the juvenile’s immature motor circuit is an adequate solution to generate adult-like dorsal-ventral bending before the animal matures. Developmental rewiring between functionally degenerate circuit solutions, that both generate symmetric bending patterns, minimizes behavioral disruption across maturation. Highlights C. elegans larvae generate symmetric motor pattern with an asymmetrically wired motor circuit. Synaptic wiring between excitatory and inhibitory motor neurons drives dorsal bending. Extrasynaptic excitation by premotor interneurons entrains ventral muscles for anti-phasic ventral bending. A developmental strategy to enable mature motor pattern before the circuit structurally matures.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".