Relations between open‐field, elevated plus‐maze, and emergence tests in C57BL/6J and BALB/c mice injected with GABA‐ and 5HT‐anxiolytic agents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two 5HT(1A) receptor agonists and chlordiazepoxide were examined in open-field, elevated plus maze, and emergence tests. At doses with no effect in the open-field, chlordiazepoxide increased open and open/total arm visits as well as open arm duration in the elevated plus maze, whereas 5HT(1A) receptor agonists showed an anxiolytic response on a single measure. The anxiolytic action of chlordiazepoxide was limited to the less active BALB/c strain. Unlike the 5HT(1A) receptor agonists, chlordiazepoxide was also anxiolytic in the emergence test, once again only in BALB/c and not C57BL/6J mice. Significant correlations were found between emergence latencies and specific indicators of anxiety in the elevated plus-maze in chlordiazepoxide-treated but not in mice treated with buspirone and 8-OH-DPAT. These results indicate that elevated plus-maze and emergence tests depend on benzodiazepine receptors. In contrast, 5HT(1A) receptor agonists were ineffective in the emergence test and no correlation was found between emergence latencies and specific indicators of anxiety in the elevated plus-maze. Though superficially similar, the emergence test seems to tap into a partially separate facet of anxiety.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".