The Novel Impact Of Treadmill Exercise And Sex Difference On Cell Proliferation and Cell Survival In The Dentate Gyrus Of G93A Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neurogenesis persists in the adult mammalian brain and can be regulated by physiological stressors influencing cell proliferation or cell survival. We investigated whether sex and treadmill running would affect cell proliferation and newborn cell survival in the dentate gyrus (DG) of G93A mice, a transgenic model over‐expressing mutant human Cu/Zn‐superoxide dismutase (SOD1) and leading to excessive oxidative stress. Proliferating and surviving cells were labeled with bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) over 7‐days before sacrificing mice @ 1 and 3 weeks. Proliferating cells were significantly higher in males than in females (p=0.009) but cell survival tended to be higher in female vs. male G93A mice (p=0.057). Running G93A mice have less proliferating cells than sedentary G93A mice (p=0.056); however, running wild type mice have significantly more proliferating cells than sedentary wild type mice (p=0.036) and than running G93A mice (p=0.040). In addition, female running G93A mice displayed more surviving cells than male running G93A mice (p=0.033). Wild type running mice showed a significant increase in cell survival vs. sedentary wild type (p=0.028). These results suggested that running promotes cell proliferation in wild type mice, but inhibits cell proliferation in G93A mice. Running promotes cell survival in male and female wild type and only female G93A mice. The sex differences in cell proliferation and survival for the G93A mice are supportive of our previous observation that female G93A mice have better survival and resistance to excessive running stress as compared with males.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".