MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

µ-Opioid Receptor Control of Glutamate/GABA Coreleasing SUM and VTA Projections to the Dentate Gyrus

2025· article· en· W4411696296 on OpenAlexafffund
Daria Oleinichenko

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsDentate gyrusNeuroscienceGlutamate receptorOpioidChemistryPsychologyReceptorHippocampusBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dentate gyrus (DG) is a hippocampal structure responsible for filtering cortical input and conveying it to CA3, where it forms associative memories. Granule cells, the principal excitatory neurons of the DG, have extensive dendritic arbors that occupy the molecular layer of the DG. The excitability of these neurons is tightly controlled by GABAergic basket cells, which synapse onto the proximal dendrites and soma of granule cells (Amaral et al., 2007). While granule cells receive the majority of their inputs from the entorhinal cortex, other cortical and subcortical structures provide input that modulates granule cell activity. For example, DG receives input from the ventral tegmental area (VTA) and the supramammillary nucleus (SUM), midbrain structures involved in control of motivation and learning (Ntamati and Lüscher, 2016; Hashimotodani et al., 2018). The VTA is best known for regulating reward and aversion behaviors through dopamine release, but its dopaminergic projections to the hippocampus are quite sparse (Han et al., 2020). Instead, most VTA–DG projections corelease glutamate and GABA. Activation of these projections reduces granule cell firing in anesthetized animals (Ntamati and Lüscher, 2016). Chemogenetic inactivation of these projections impairs acquisition and reinstatement of fear conditioning in mice, suggesting they aid the formation and retrieval of emotionally valent memories (Han et al., 2020). SUM–hippocampus projections also corelease glutamate and GABA, and they synapse onto both granule cells and surrounding interneurons. Recent studies show that stimulation of SUM fibers causes an overall increase in granule cell activity (Hashimotodani et al., 2018) and inactivation of these projections in vivo impairs retrieval of spatial memories (Li et al., 2020). They have also been linked to emotional memory processing. Granule cell activity is also regulated by activation of µ-opioid receptors (MOR), which are abundantly expressed in the DG, rendering it susceptible to the effects of MOR … Correspondence should be addressed to Daria Oleinichenko at daria.oleinichenko{at}ubc.ca.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuroscience→Same topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research→French-language works237,207→