MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000958688 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0079561

Combining Stressors That Individually Impede Long-Term Memory Blocks All Memory Processes

2013· article· en· W2000958688 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah Dalesman, Hiroshi Sunada, Morgan Teskey, Ken Lukowiak

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Innovates
KeywordsLymnaea stagnalisStressorNeurosciencePsychologyBiologySnailEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of stress on memory are typically assessed individually; however, in reality different stressors are often experienced simultaneously. Here we determined the effect that two environmentally relevant stressors, crowding and low calcium availability, have on memory and neural activity following operant conditioning of aerial respiration in the pond snail, Lymnaea stagnalis. We measured aerial breathing behaviour and activity of a neuron necessary for memory formation, right pedal dorsal 1 (RPeD1), in the central pattern generator (CPG) that drives aerial respiration in untrained animals, and assessed how these traits changed following training. In naïve animals both crowding and combined stressors significantly depressed burst activity in RPeD1 which correlated with a depression in aerial breathing behaviour, whereas low calcium availability had no effect on RPeD1 activity. Following training, changes in burst activity in RPeD1 correlated with behavioural changes, decreasing relative to their naïve state at 3 h and 24 h in control conditions when both intermediate-term memory (ITM: 3 h) and long-term memory (LTM: 24 h) are formed, at 3 h but not 24 h when exposed to individual stressors when only ITM is formed, and did not change in combined stressors (i.e. when no memory is formed). Additionally, we also found that Lymnaea formed short-term memory (STM: 10 min) in the presence of individual stressors or under control conditions, but failed to do so in the presence of combined stressors. Our data demonstrate that by combining stressors that individually block LTM only we can block all memory processes. Therefore the effects of two stressors with similar individual affects on memory phenotype may be additive when experienced in combination.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.180 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207