Tonic excitation of nucleus reuniens decreases prefrontal‐hippocampal coordination during slow‐wave states
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nucleus reuniens of the thalamus (RE) is an important node between the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) and the hippocampus (HPC). Previously, we have shown that its mode of activity and its influence in mPFC-HPC communication is dependent upon brain state. During slow-wave states, RE units are closely and rhythmically coupled to the ongoing mPFC-slow oscillation (SO), while during activated (theta) states, RE neurons fire in an arrhythmic and tonically active manner. Inactivating the RE selectively impoverishes coordination of the SO between mPFC and HPC and interestingly, both mPFC and RE stimulation during the SO cause larger responses in the HPC than during theta. It is unclear if the activity patterns within the RE across states may play a role in both phenomena. Here, we optogenetically excited RE neurons in a tonic fashion to assess the impact on mPFC-HPC coupling. This stimulation decreased the influence of mPFC stimulation in the HPC during SO states, in a manner similar to what is observed across state changes into theta. Importantly, this type of stimulation had no effect on evoked responses during theta. Perhaps more interestingly, tonic optogenetic excitation of the RE also decreased mPFC-HPC SO coherence. Thus, it may not be the integrity of the RE per se that is responsible for efficient communication between mPFC and HPC, but rather the particular state in which RE neurons find themselves. Our results have direct implications for how distant brain regions can communicate most effectively, an issue that is ultimately important for activity-dependent processes occurring during slow-wave sleep-dependent memory consolidation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".