MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249438881 · doi:10.1042/bst0331299

Physiological roles of spine motility: development, plasticity and disorders

2005· review· en· W4249438881 on OpenAlexaff
R. Anne McKinney

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemical Society Transactions · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDendritic spineExcitatory postsynaptic potentialNeuroscienceGlutamate receptorSynaptic plasticityNeurotransmitter receptorPostsynaptic potentialHippocampal formationDendritic filopodiaNeurotransmitterSynapseBiologyChemistryReceptorInhibitory postsynaptic potentialCentral nervous systemBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vast majority of excitatory connections in the hippocampus are made on dendritic spines. Both dendritic spines and molecules within the membrane are able to move, but the physiological role of these movements is unclear. In the developing brain, spines show highly dynamic behaviour thought to facilitate new synaptic connections. Dynamic movements also occur in adults but the role of this movement is unclear. We have studied the effects of the most important excitatory neurotransmitter, glutamat, and found receptor activation to enhance movement of molecules within the spine membrane. This action of glutamate may be important in regulating the trafficking of neurotransmitter receptors that mediate change in synaptic function. In addition, we have studied the dynamic interactions between pre- and postsynaptic structures labelled with FM 4-64 and a membrane-targeted GFP (green fluorescent protein), respectively, in hippocampal slice cultures under conditions of increased activity, such as epilepsy. Our findings suggest a novel form of activity-dependent synaptic plasticity where spontaneous glutamate release is sufficient to trigger changes in the hippocampal microcircuitry by attracting neighbouring spines responsive to an enhanced level of extracellular glutamate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemical Society TransactionsSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207