Endogenous Melatonin is Not Obligatory for the Regulation of the Rat Sleep-Wake Cycle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: Though melatonin and melatonin receptor agonists are in clinical use and under development for treating insomnia, the role of endogenous melatonin in the regulation of the sleep-wake cycle remains uncertain. Some clinical case reports suggest that reduced nocturnal melatonin secretion is linked to sleep disruption, but pineal-gland removal in experimental animals has given variable results. DESIGN: The present study examined the effects of pinealectomy on the diurnal sleep-wake cycle of rats implanted with a radiotransmitter to allow continuous measurement of cortical electroencephalogram, electromyogram, and core temperature (Tc) without restraint in their home cages. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Tc was slightly (0.2 degrees C) but significantly lower after pineal removal. The total amount and diurnal distribution of locomotor activity, wake, non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep, and rapid eye movement (REM) sleep were unaltered in pinealectomized rats compared to sham-operated controls. Sleep consolidation measured by determining wake, NREM sleep, and REM sleep bout length and frequency was also unchanged. The EEG power spectrum during NREM sleep was unchanged, but a significant decrease in theta power (5-8 Hz) during REM sleep episodes was found. CONCLUSIONS: Our data provide no evidence that endogenous circulating melatonin plays a role in regulating the sleep-wake cycle in rats. However, because cortical theta oscillations are generated in the CA1-3 layer of the hippocampus, neurons known to express melatonin receptors, this suggests that a lack of melatonin following pineal removal influences the function of these neurons and is consistent with previous work suggesting that endogenous melatonin is an important regulator of hippocampal physiology.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".