The translational inhibitor and amnestic agent emetine also suppresses ongoing hippocampal neural activity similarly to other blockers of protein synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The consolidation of memory is thought to ultimately depend on the synthesis of new proteins, since translational inhibitors such as anisomycin and cycloheximide adversely affect the permanence of long-term memory. However, when applied directly in brain, these agents also profoundly suppress neural activity to an extent that is directly correlated to the degree of protein synthesis inhibition caused. Given that neural activity itself is likely to help mediate consolidation, this finding is a serious criticism of the strict de novo protein hypothesis of memory. Here, we test the neurophysiological effects of another translational inhibitor, emetine. Unilateral intra-hippocampal infusion of emetine suppressed ongoing local field and multiunit activity at ipsilateral sites as compared to the contralateral hippocampus in a fashion that was positively correlated to the degree of protein synthesis inhibition as confirmed by autoradiography. This suppression of activity was also specific to the circumscribed brain region in which protein synthesis inhibition took place. These experiments provide further evidence that ongoing protein synthesis is necessary and fundamental for neural function and suggest that the disruption of memory observed in behavioral experiments using translational inhibitors may be due, in large part, to neural suppression.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".