MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413401173 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2025.116167

A consensus definition for deep layer 6 excitatory neurons in mouse somatosensory, visual, and motor cortex

2025· article· en· W4413401173 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Su-Jeong Kim, Travis A. Babola, Kiwoong Lee, Alina Spiegel, Kihwan Lee, Chanel J. Matney, Eva M. Schulteis, Austin E. Coye, Mikhail Proskurin, Hyun‐Wook Kang, J Kim, Maxime Chevée, Juhyun Lee, Alec G. Cabalinan, Seong Yeol An, Samuel P Bronckers, Patrick O. Kanold, Loyal A. Goff, Juhyun Kim, Solange P. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship ProgramNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication DisordersNational Eye InstituteNational Institute of Mental HealthDiscovery InstituteNational Research Foundation of KoreaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaBoehringer Ingelheim FondsNational Institutes of HealthDirectorate for Biological SciencesKorea Brain Research InstituteJohns Hopkins UniversityEsther A. and Joseph Klingenstein FundBrain and Behavior Research FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsNeuroscienceSomatosensory systemExcitatory postsynaptic potentialMotor cortexVisual cortexCortex (anatomy)BiologyInhibitory postsynaptic potentialStimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To understand neocortical function, it is helpful to define cortical cell types. Recent studies indicate that neurons in the deepest cortical layer play roles in mediating thalamocortical interactions and modulating brain state and are implicated in neuropsychiatric disease. However, understanding the functions of deep layer 6 (layer 6b [L6b]) neurons has been hampered by the lack of agreed-upon definitions for these neuron types. We compared commonly used methods for defining L6b neurons, including molecular, transcriptional, and morphological approaches and transgenic mouse lines, and identified a core population of L6b neurons. This population does not innervate the thalamus, unlike layer 6 corticothalamic neurons (L6CThNs) in more superficial layer 6. Rather, single L6b neurons project ipsilaterally between cortical areas. Their intrinsic electrophysiological properties were stable after the first two postnatal weeks. The four methods we identify for defining L6b neurons enable comparisons across studies testing their contributions to cortical function.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.004

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207