MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315488170 · doi:10.3389/fnins.2022.1055554

Enhanced detection sensitivity of neuronal activity patterns using CaMPARI1 vs. CaMPARI2

2023· article· en· W4315488170 on OpenAlexaff
Aniruddha Das, Daniel Margevicius, Julie Borovicka, Jacob Icardi, Davina Patel, Marie-Ève Paquet, Hod Dana

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroscience · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)NeuroscienceComputer sciencePsychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Calcium-modulated photoactivatable ratiometric integrator (CaMPARI) is a calcium ion (Ca 2+ )- and light-dependent genetically encoded fluorescent activity integrator that can capture snapshots of neuronal activity through an irreversible process known as photoconversion. This unique property was previously used to label neurons based upon their tuning properties in order to map synaptic connectivity and to record large-scale neuronal activity in freely moving mice without attaching any mechanical device to them. The latest version of CaMPARI (CaMPARI2) was engineered to enhance the contrast generated by photoconverting the green protein to the activity-dependent red form and to reduce the Ca 2+ -independent photoconversion rate compared to the first generation of CaMPARI (CaMPARI1). However, here we show that this optimization process also resulted in reduced photoconversion efficiency of active neurons in the mouse cortex and hippocampus. Through side-by-side comparison of the two CaMPARI sensors under several experimental conditions, we show that CaMPARI1 exhibits a substantially higher red-to-green ratio in active cells than CaMPARI2. In addition, we show that CaMPARI1 also functions as a more sensitive traditional Ca 2+ sensor than CaMPARI2 by producing larger activity-driven dynamic fluorescence changes in the observed neurons. Therefore, we conclude that during the optimization process of CaMPARI2, some of the sensor’s characteristics were not predicted properly by in vitro screening assays, and therefore in vivo screening and validation steps should be included in future optimization attempts to increase the predictability of screening pipelines.

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 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 score0.269
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.258 · 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.

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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroscienceSame topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207