MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213319477 · doi:10.1073/pnas.2114002119

The mouse brain after foot shock in four dimensions: Temporal dynamics at a single-cell resolution

2022· article· en· W4213319477 on OpenAlexaff
Valeria Bonapersona, Heike Schuler, Ruth Damsteegt, Youri Adolfs, R. Jeroen Pasterkamp, Martijn P. van den Heuvel, Marian Joëls, R. Angela Sarabdjitsingh

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsDynamics (music)Resolution (logic)Brain CellTemporal resolutionFoot (prosody)Shock (circulatory)NeuroscienceBiologyComputer sciencePhysicsArtificial intelligenceMedicineOpticsArtAcousticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acute stress leads to sequential activation of functional brain networks. A biologically relevant question is exactly which (single) cells belonging to brain networks are changed in activity over time after acute stress across the entire brain. We developed a preprocessing and analytical pipeline to chart whole-brain immediate early genes' expression-as proxy for cellular activity-after a single stressful foot shock in four dimensions: that is, from functional networks up to three-dimensional (3D) single-cell resolution and over time. The pipeline is available as an R package. Most brain areas (96%) showed increased numbers of c-fos+ cells after foot shock, yet hypothalamic areas stood out as being most active and prompt in their activation, followed by amygdalar, prefrontal, hippocampal, and finally, thalamic areas. At the cellular level, c-fos+ density clearly shifted over time across subareas, as illustrated for the basolateral amygdala. Moreover, some brain areas showed increased numbers of c-fos+ cells, while others-like the dentate gyrus-dramatically increased c-fos intensity in just a subset of cells, reminiscent of engrams; importantly, this "strategy" changed after foot shock in half of the brain areas. One of the strengths of our approach is that single-cell data were simultaneously examined across all of the 90 brain areas and can be visualized in 3D in our interactive web portal.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations48
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207