Up-regulation of CB1 cannabinoid receptors located at glutamatergic terminals in the medial prefrontal cortex of the obese Zucker rat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study describes a detailed neuroanatomical distribution map of the cannabinoid type 1 (CB1) receptor, along with the biochemical characterization of the expression and functional coupling to their cognate Gi/o proteins in the medial prefrontal cortex (mPCx) of the obese Zucker rats. The CB1 receptor density was higher in the prelimbic (PL) and infralimbic (IL) subregions of the mPCx of obese Zucker rats relative to their lean littermates which was associated with a higher percentage of CB1 receptor immunopositive excitatory presynaptic terminals in PL and IL. Also, a higher expression of CB1 receptors and WIN55,212-2-stimulated [35S]GTPγS binding was observed in the mPCx but not in the neocortex (NCx) and hippocampus of obese rats. Low-frequency stimulation in layers II/III of the mPCx induced CB1 receptor-dependent long-term synaptic plasticity in IL of area obese Zucker but not lean rats. Overall, the elevated 2-AG levels, up-regulation of CB1 receptors, and increased agonist-stimulated [35S]GTPγS binding strongly suggest that hyperactivity of the endocannabinoid signaling takes place at the glutamatergic terminals of the mPCx in the obese Zucker rat. These findings could endorse the importance of the CB1 receptors located in the mPCx in the development of obesity in Zucker rats.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".