Fluoxetine and the dentate gyrus: memory, recovery of function, and electrophysiology
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic fluoxetine increases neurogenesis in the dentate gyrus (DG). In view of the widespread clinical use of fluoxetine and the well-established role of the DG in memory, surprisingly few studies have examined the effects of fluoxetine on memory and hippocampal electrophysiology. Additionally, few studies have evaluated the potential for fluoxetine to promote recovery of function after DG damage. Therefore, we studied the effects of long-term administration of fluoxetine on both spatial-reference memory and working memory, recovery of function after intrahippocampal colchicine infusions, which can destroy 50-70% of DG granule cells, and electrophysiological responses in the DG to perforant path stimulation in freely moving rats. Chronic fluoxetine did not affect matching-to-place or reference-memory performance in intact rats in the Morris water-maze task. Surprisingly, in rats with DG damage, recovery of function on both tasks was adversely affected by chronic fluoxetine. Finally, unlike an earlier study that reported fluoxetine-induced increases in hippocampal population spike amplitudes and excitatory postsynaptic potential slopes in urethane-anesthetized rats, electrophysiological measures in DG of freely moving rats were not affected by chronic fluoxetine treatment.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it