MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4305082438 · doi:10.1101/2022.10.10.511566

Newly formed place cells are stabilized by coordinated population activity during REM sleep

2022· preprint· en· W4305082438 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Boyce, Hyun Choong Yong, James E. Carmichael, Mark P. Brandon, Sylvain Williams

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHippocampal formationNeuroscienceMemory consolidationPopulationOptogeneticsMemory formationRecallPsychologyLocal field potentialNeural activityHippocampusCognitive psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The involvement of rapid-eye-movement sleep (REMs) in spatial memory formation was recently demonstrated, although how neural activity during REMs influences newly-formed place field stability remains unclear. Here, we combined large-scale single-unit recordings of mouse hippocampal CA1 with an established optogenetic approach enabling REMs-selective inhibition of medial septum GABAergic neurons (MSGABA), resulting in spatial memory deficits when applied post-learning. Although individual neural activity was unaffected by REMs-selective MSGABA inhibition during a post-learning rest session, both the synchrony of population-level activity bursts observed during REMs occurring in the rest session and place field stability measured during subsequent memory recall testing were reduced vs controls. However, the latter effect was limited to place cells participating in population activity during REMs, as stability of non-participant place cells was relatively weak and indifferent between groups. This suggests that synchronous CA1 population activity during REMs stabilizes spatial representations in a plastic subpopulation of participating CA1 neurons.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicSleep and Wakefulness Research→French-language works237,207→