Ultrastructure of immature synaptic inputs in the lateral superior olive of rodent brainstem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Neurons of the lateral superior olive (LSO), which compute intensity differences between the two ears, receive two primary inputs, an ipsilaterally arising excitatory input and a contralaterally arising inhibitory input, that are precisely matched for stimulus frequency. Circuit refinement to establish this precise match takes place within the first few postnatal weeks through elimination of single-fiber inputs and concomitant strengthening of the remaining inputs. However, little is known about the ultrastructure of these young synapses and about how changes in physical features of these synapses could contribute to refinement. To characterize pre-hearing postnatal development of somatic synapses in the LSO, we performed transmission electron microscopy and examined synapses in the rodent LSO from birth to hearing onset at postnatal day 13. Synaptic vesicles and mitochondria in putative synaptic boutons were surprisingly scarce at birth. During the second week, bouton enlargement was accompanied by an increase in the number of vesicles and mitochondria. The size of mitochondria also increased, pointing to changes in functional and metabolic needs of synapses. Our results reveal extensive remodeling at individual presynaptic terminals that could strengthen single-fiber inputs and contribute to the development of robust synaptic transmission.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".