A sex difference in circadian food-anticipatory rhythms in mice: Interaction with dopamine D1 receptor knockout.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Restricted daily feeding schedules induce circadian rhythms of food-anticipatory activity (FAA) in mice and other species. The entrainment pathway(s) and location(s) of circadian oscillators driving these rhythms have not been definitively established. An important role for dopamine signaling and the dorsal striatum is suggested by a confluence of observations, including shifting of FAA rhythms by dopamine receptor agonists and attenuation by antagonists and D1 receptor knockout (D1R KO). The dopamine reward system exhibits sexual dimorphisms in structure and function; if FAA rhythms are regulated by this system, then FAA may also be sexually dimorphic. To assess this prediction, disk running and general activity were recorded continuously in male and female C57BL/6J mice with food available ad libitum and then restricted to a 4-hr daily meal in the middle of the light period. Compared with male mice, FAA in female mice was significantly reduced in duration, total count, peak level, and ratio relative to nocturnal activity. To determine whether these differences were mediated by D1 receptors, male and female homozygous D1R KO mice were examined. Compared with wild type and heterozygous mice, female and male D1R KO mice exhibited a marked attenuation of FAA parameters. The magnitude of the attenuation was greater in female mice. These results confirm an important role for dopamine D1 receptors in the circadian mechanism by which mice anticipate a daily meal, and they reveal a previously unreported sexual dimorphism in the expression of food-anticipatory rhythms that is amplified by D1R KO.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".