MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Additional file 1 of Asymmetric dysregulation of glutamate dynamics across the synaptic cleft in a mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease

2024· article· en· W6958494128 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPostsynaptic potentialSynapseStimulationNMDA receptorPostsynaptic CurrentNeurotransmissionGlutamate receptorBlockade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Additional file 1. Figure 1. NMDA receptor blockade reduces postsynaptic but not presynaptic calcium responses to high-frequency stimulation. (A) Presynaptic GCaMP6f response to high-frequency stimulation (HFS) before (black) and after (blue) bath application of d-APV (50 μM). B Postsynaptic GCaMP6f response to HFS before (black) and after (orange) d-APV. C postsynaptic GCaMP responses are more sensitive to NMDAR blockade than presynaptic GCaMP responses, with a 50% reduction observed in the postsynaptic GCaMP response. Error bars represent s.e.m. *** p < 0.001. Figure 2: GLT-1 expression is significantly reduced in 3xTg hippocampus. WT and 3xTg mice were perfused at 6 months of age. GLT-1 intensity was quantified in stratum radiatum. All immunostaining was performed at the same time and imaging parameters (LED intensity, exposure times) remained consistent for both genotypes. WT n = 12, 3xTg n = 10. Scale bar in A: 50 μm. Error bars represent s.e.m. ** p < 0.01. Figure 3. Peak iGluSnFR responses do not differ between WT and 3xTg mice. A Postsynaptic iGluSnFR response peaks in WT (black) and 3xTg (orange) mice. B Presynaptic iGluSnFR response peaks in WT (black) and 3xTg (orange) mice. Figure 4. iGluSnFR dynamics at individual iGluSnFR-positive puncta are slower to decay in 3xTg mice. (A) Representative image showing presynaptic iGluSnFR expression. ROIs are drawn around individual iGluSnFR puncta representing putative single synapses. B Representative iGluSnFR responses to electrical stimulation (100 pulses, 100 Hz, indicated by the black line above the traces). C Box-and-whisker plots of putative single synapse decay tau values following stimulation. Individual ROI responses are shown as dots within the plot. (D) Cumulative distribution plot of the decay tau values at the quantified ROIs. Scale bar in A: 10 µm. *** p < 0.001, **** p < 0.0001. Figure 5. Presynaptic glutamate clearance impairment and spared postsynaptic clearance in the 3xTg hippocampus replicated at 32 degrees. A–C Postsynaptic iGluSnFR expression (A). Average traces in WT (black) and 3xTg mice (orange) in response to 5 (B, left) or 100 (B, right) pulses of evoked activity. Grouped data are shown in C. D–F Same as A-C but for presynaptic iGluSnFR expression. All experiments conducted in ACSF heated to 32 ℃. Horizontal lines above iGluSnFR traces indicate the timing and duration of electrical stimulation. Scale bars in B and E: 10 %ΔF/F, 200 ms (left) and 20 %ΔF/F, 500 ms (right). 3xTg traces scaled to match the peak of WT traces. Traces in boxes show average iGluSnFR responses normalized to the value at the end of the one second of electrical stimulation. Error bars represent s.e.m. *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001. Figure 6. Peak iGluSnFR responses do not differ between WT and 3xTg mice after GLT-1 blockade with DHK. A Presynaptic iGluSnFR response peaks in WT (black) and 3xTg (orange) mice. B Postsynaptic iGluSnFR response peaks in WT (black) and 3xTg (orange) mice. Response peaks were obtained in the presence of a saturating concentration (300 μM) of the GLT-1 inhibitor DHK. Figure 7. Diffusion does not differ between WT and 3xTg mice. (A-C) Presynaptic iGluSnFR responses to 5 (A) and 100 (B) pulses in the presence of 100 μM TBOA to block transporter-mediated uptake. D-F Same for A-C but for postsynaptic iGluSnFR expression. Horizontal lines above iGluSnFR traces indicate the timing and duration of electrical stimulation. Scale bars in A and D: 10 %ΔF/F, 1000 ms. Scale bars in B and E: 25 %ΔF/F, 2000 ms. 3xTg traces scaled to match the peak of WT traces. Traces in boxes show average iGluSnFR responses normalized to the value at the end of the one second of electrical stimulation. Error bars represent s.e.m. Figure 8. Peak iGluSnFR responses do not differ between WT and 3xTg mice after non-selective glutamate transporter blockade with TBOA. A Presynaptic iGluSnFR response peaks in WT (black) and 3xTg (orange) mice. B Postsynaptic iGluSnFR response peaks in WT (black) and 3xTg (orange) mice. Response peaks were obtained in the presence of a saturating concentration (100 μM) of the glutamate transporter inhibitor TBOA. Figure 9. Glutamate clearance is significantly slower in astrocytes of the 3xTg hippocampus. A Schematic of GFAP-iGluSnFR. B Average iGluSnFR responses to 5 (left) and 100 (right) pulses of stimulation in WT (black) and 3xTg (orange) mice. Grouped data shown in (C). Horizontal lines above iGluSnFR traces indicate the timing and duration of electrical stimulation. Scale bar in B: 10 %ΔF/F, 200 ms. Scale bar in C: 25 %ΔF/F, 500 ms. 3xTg traces scaled to match the peak of WT traces. Traces in box show average iGluSnFR responses normalized to the value at the end of the one second of electrical stimulation. Error bars represent s.e.m. *** p < 0.001.

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)0.012
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
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 integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.8590.133

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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