Lithium ameliorates autistic-like behaviors induced by neonatal isolation in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neonatal isolation is a widely accepted model to study the long-term behavioral changes produced by the early life events. However, it remains unknown whether neonatal isolation can induce autistic-like behaviors, and if so, whether pharmacological treatment can overcome it. Here, we reported that newborn rats subjected to individual isolations from their mother and nest for 1 h per day from postnatal days 1-9 displayed apparent autistic-like symptoms including social deficits, excessive repetitive self-grooming behavior, and increased anxiety- and depressive-like behaviors tested in young adult (postnatal days 42-56) compared to normal reared controls. Furthermore, these behavioral changes were accompanied by impaired adult hippocampal neurogenesis and reduced the ratio of excitatory/inhibitory synaptic transmissions, as reflected by an increase in spontaneous inhibitory postsynaptic current (sIPSC) and normal spontaneous excitatory postsynaptic current (sEPSC) in the hippocampal CA1 pyramidal neuron. More importantly, chronic administration of lithium, a clinically used mood stabilizer, completely overcame neonatal isolation-induced autistic-like behaviors, and restored adult hippocampal neurogenesis as well as the balance between excitatory and inhibitory activities to physiological levels. These findings indicate that neonatal isolation may produce autistic-like behaviors, and lithium may be a potential therapeutic agent against autism spectrum disorders (ASD) during development.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".