MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6920711964 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.21162931

Additional file 2 of Stimulation of protein synthesis by optogenetic and chemical induction of excitatory synaptic plasticity in hippocampal somatostatin interneurons

2022· article· en· W6920711964 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPuromycinColocalizationHippocampal formationCycloheximideImmunofluorescenceProtein biosynthesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Additional file 2: Figure S1. Specificity of puromycin labeling in SUnSET assay. (a) Diagram of puromycin entering the ribosomal A-site, arrest of protein synthesis and release of premature peptides, later detected using a puromycin specific antibody. (b) Representative images of EYFP and puromycin immunofluorescence showing specificity of puromycin antibody in absence (upper panels) or presence (middle panels) of puromycin, and no puromycin labeling without puromycin antibody (bottom panels). Hippocampal slices were exposed with or without puromycin to Sham-treatment of late LTP protocol. Arrows indicate cells with colocalization of EYFP and puromycin fluorescence signal. Scale bar, 100 µm. (c) Summary bar graph of puromycin colocalization in EYFP cells expressed as percentage of total EYFP cells (4 independent experiments with 1-2 sections analyzed per experiment, in each group; n = 275 EYFP cells with puromycin co-localization). Figure S2. Intact SOM-IN basal protein synthesis in mice with conditional Rptor knock-out, and unchanged pyramidal cell layer puromycin immunofluorescence after chemical persistent LTP induction. (a) Representative images and summary bar graph (each group 5 independent slice experiments from 5 animals, 1-5 sections analyzed per experiment) of puromycin immunofluorescence in SOM-INs of SOM-EYFP WT and SOM-EYFP-Raptor KO mice, showing no difference of puromycin fluorescence in SOM-INs (sham-treatment) of control and knockout mice. Arrows indicate cells with colocalization of EYFP with puromycin immunofluorescence. Summary bar graph (mean ± SEM; WT 570 cells and Raptor KO 722 cells). (b-c) Representative images and summary bar graphs (each group 3 independent slice experiments from 3 animals, 1-3 sections analyzed per experiment) of puromycin immunofluorescence in the CA1 pyramidal layer of SOM-EYFP WT (b) and SOM-EYFP-Raptor KO (c), showing no difference in puromycin fluorescence following chemical persistent LTP induction. Summary bar graph (mean ± SEM; number of fields of view for WT, Sham 53 and DHPG 88; for Raptor-KO, Sham 75 and DHPG 101). Scale bars, 50 µm. Student’s t-tests, ns not significant

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.8970.243

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.241 · 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.

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research→French-language works237,207→