Changes in the social environment induce neurogenic plasticity predominantly in niches residing in sensory structures of the zebrafish brain independently of cortisol levels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The social environment is known to modulate adult neurogenesis. Studies in mammals and birds have shown a strong correlation between social isolation and decreases in neurogenesis, whereas time spent in an enriched environment has been shown to restore these deficits and enhance neurogenesis. These data suggest that there exists a common adaptive response among neurogenic niches to each extreme of the social environment. We sought to further test this hypothesis in zebrafish, a social species with distinct neurogenic niches within primary sensory structures and telencephalic nuclei of the brain. By examining stages of adult neurogenesis, including the proliferating stem/progenitor population, their surviving cohort, and the resulting newly differentiated neuronal population, we show that niches residing in sensory structures are most sensitive to changes in the social context, and that social isolation or novelty are both capable of decreasing the number of proliferating cells while increasing the number of newborn neurons within a single niche. Contrary to observations in rodents, we demonstrate that social novelty, a form of enrichment, does not consistently rescue deficits in cell proliferation following social isolation, and that cortisol levels do not negatively regulate changes in adult neurogenesis, but are correlated with the social context. We propose that enhancement or suppression of adult neurogenesis in the zebrafish brain under different social contexts depends largely on the type of niche (sensory or telencephalic), experience from the preceding social environment, and occurs independently of changes in cortisol levels.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".