MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396708310 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2024.114191

The mouse motor system contains multiple premotor areas and partially follows human organizational principles

2024· article· en· W4396708310 on OpenAlexaff
Alberto Lazari, Mohamed Tachrount, Juan Miguel Valverde, Daniel S. Papp, Antoine Beauchamp, Paul J. McCarthy, Jacob Ellegood, Joanes Grandjean, Heidi Johansen‐Berg, Valerio Zerbi, Jason P. Lerch, Rogier B. Mars

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalSickKids FoundationPolytechnique Montréal
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilDirectorate for Biological SciencesOtto A. Malm LahjoitusrahastoEuropean CommissionUniversity of OxfordWellcome TrustSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPremotor cortexNeuroscienceSupplementary motor areaMotor cortexHuman brainBiologyCortex (anatomy)Primary motor cortexMotor areaAnterior cingulate cortexPosterior parietal cortexMyelinPsychologyCentral nervous systemAnatomyFunctional magnetic resonance imagingCognitionDorsum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While humans are known to have several premotor cortical areas, secondary motor cortex (M2) is often considered to be the only higher-order motor area of the mouse brain and is thought to combine properties of various human premotor cortices. Here, we show that axonal tracer, functional connectivity, myelin mapping, gene expression, and optogenetics data contradict this notion. Our analyses reveal three premotor areas in the mouse, anterior-lateral motor cortex (ALM), anterior-lateral M2 (aM2), and posterior-medial M2 (pM2), with distinct structural, functional, and behavioral properties. By using the same techniques across mice and humans, we show that ALM has strikingly similar functional and microstructural properties to human anterior ventral premotor areas and that aM2 and pM2 amalgamate properties of human pre-SMA and cingulate cortex. These results provide evidence for the existence of multiple premotor areas in the mouse and chart a comparative map between the motor systems of humans and mice.

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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations18
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207