MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385788482 · doi:10.1113/jp284040

Metaplasticity: Dark exposure boosts local excitability and visual plasticity in adult human cortex

2023· article· en· W4385788482 on OpenAlexafffund
Seung Hyun Min, Zili Wang, Meng Ting Chen, Rongjie Hu, Ling Gong, Zhifen He, Xiaoxiao Wang, Robert F. Hess, Jiawei Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchState Key Laboratory of OphthalmologyUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaScience Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars of Zhejiang ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaWenzhou Medical University
KeywordsVisual cortexNeuroplasticityNeuroscienceMonocular deprivationPlasticityMetaplasticitySensory systemPsychologyExcitatory postsynaptic potentialBalance (ability)Human brainInhibitory postsynaptic potentialSynaptic plasticityOcular dominanceMedicineInternal medicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An interlude of dark exposure for about 1 week is known to shift excitatory/inhibitory (E/I) balance of the mammalian visual cortex, promoting plasticity and accelerating visual recovery in animals that have experienced cortical lesions during development. However, the translational impact of our understanding of dark exposure from animal studies to humans remains elusive. Here, we used magnetic resonance spectroscopy as a probe for E/I balance in the primary visual cortex (V1) to determine the effect of 60 min of dark exposure, and measured binocular combination as a behavioural assay to assess visual plasticity in 14 normally sighted human adults. To induce neuroplastic changes in the observers, we introduced 60 min of monocular deprivation, which is known to temporarily shift sensory eye balance in favour of the previously deprived eye. We report that prior dark exposure for 60 min strengthens local excitability in V1 and boosts visual plasticity in normal adults. However, we show that it does not promote plasticity in amblyopic adults. Nevertheless, our findings are surprising, given the fact that the interlude is very brief. Interestingly, we find that the increased concentration of the excitatory neurotransmitter is not strongly correlated with the enhanced functional plasticity. Instead, the absolute degree of change in its concentration is related to the boost, suggesting that the dichotomy of cortical excitation and inhibition might not explain the physiological basis of plasticity in humans. We present the first evidence that an environmental manipulation that shifts cortical E/I balance can also act as a metaplastic facilitator for visual plasticity in humans. KEY POINTS: A brief interlude (60 min) of dark exposure increased the local concentration of glutamine/glutamate but not that of GABA in the visual cortex of adult humans. After dark exposure, the degree of the shift in sensory eye dominance in favour of the previously deprived eye from short-term monocular deprivation was larger than that from only monocular deprivation. The neurochemical and behavioural measures were associated: the magnitude of the shift in the concentration of glutamine/glutamate was correlated with the boost in perceptual plasticity after dark exposure. Surprisingly, the increase in the concentration of glutamine/glutamate was not correlated with the perceptual boost after dark exposure, suggesting that the physiological mechanism of how E/I balance regulates plasticity is not deterministic. In other words, an increased excitation did not unilaterally promote plasticity.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physiology→Same topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research→French-language works237,207→