MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409316239 · doi:10.1101/2025.04.09.647923

Noradrenergic-dependent restoration of visual discrimination in a mouse model of <i>SYNGAP1</i> -related disorder

2025· preprint· en· W4409316239 on OpenAlexaff
Danai Katsanevaki, Nathalie Dupuy, Sam A. Booker, Damien Wright, Aisling Kenny, Zihao Chen, Nina Kudryashova, Pippa Howitt, Andrew C. Stanfield, Peter C. Kind, Nathalie L. Rochefort

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Centre
FundersSimons Initiative for the Developing BrainWellcome Trust
KeywordsPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Atypical sensory processing in neurodevelopmental disorders contributes to cognitive, social, and behavioural disruptions, yet underlying neurophysiological mechanisms remain unclear. Using a mouse model of SYNGAP1 haploinsufficiency (HET), a common monogenic cause of intellectual disability and autism, we investigated visual processing deficits. Syngap HET mice exhibited impaired behavioural visual discriminability, associated with reduced coding precision for visual stimuli in the primary visual cortex (V1). Notably, intrinsic properties of V1 neurons and visual responses under anaesthesia were unaltered, suggesting behavioural state-dependent disruptions in awake Syngap HET mice. Supporting this, both mice and individuals with SYNGAP1 haploinsufficiency exhibited larger pupil size during visual stimulation, implicating neuromodulatory dysfunction. Targeting noradrenergic tone systemically with an α 2 -adrenergic receptor agonist restored V1 coding precision in Syngap HET mice. Our findings reveal neuromodulatory dysregulation as a novel mechanism underlying sensory disruptions in SYNGAP1 -related disorder, highlighting potential therapeutic targets for addressing sensory impairments in neurodevelopmental disorders.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.220 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207