MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413920596 · doi:10.22215/cujs.v5i1.5309

Zona Incerta Suppressed Escape During Hunger

2025· article· en· W4413920596 on OpenAlexaff
Jenny Phy‐Lim, Persephone A. Miller, Melissa J. Chee

Bibliographic record

VenueCarleton undergraduate journal of science. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZona incertaPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wild animals must avoid starvation and predators to survive. However, the motivation to seek food and shelter promote opposing behaviors and require rapid neural adaptations that are poorly understood. The zona incerta (ZI) is a specialized region that integrates multisensory input, projects strongly to motor-related regions, and can thus initiate escape from threats to survive. One subset of medial ZI neurons producing dopamine (DA) and gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) send dense projections to the medial motor-related superior colliculus (SCm), which promotes escape from threats in the upper visual field. We determined whether ZI-GABA/DA cells respond to hunger and investigated whether activating ZI-GABA/DA cells in hungry mice suppressed escape. We transduced ZI-GABA/DA cells with an excitatory chemogenetic receptor hM3(Dq) and found that stimulating their projections in the medial SCm suppressed escape from an upper visual threat in male and female mice. Interestingly, fasting activated ZI-GABA/DA cells and enhanced hM3(Dq)-mediated escape suppression. To evaluate the contribution of GABA and/or DA in escape suppression, we co-infused a cocktail of DA or GABA receptor antagonists, respectively. Both GABA and DA are required to suppress escape in fasted male mice, but DA independently suppressed escape in female mice. Activation of ZI-GABA/DA cells did not impact locomotor or any anxiety-related functions but uniquely integrated hunger signals to suppress escape. Our findings suggested that the ZI-SCm neurocircuit is sexually dimorphic and that the ZI is a critical node regulating the competition between the need to seek food and shelter.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.676

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.275 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCarleton undergraduate journal of science.Same topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207