MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Posttraining Ablation of Adult-Generated Olfactory Granule Cells Degrades Odor–Reward Memories

2014· article· en· W2022014092 on OpenAlexafffund
Maithé Arruda-Carvalho, Katherine G. Akers, Axel Guskjolen, Masanori Sakaguchi, Sheena A. Josselyn, Paul W. Frankland

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHospital for Sick Children
KeywordsOdorNeuroscienceNeurogenesisOlfactory bulbPsychologyMemory consolidationHippocampusCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proliferation of neural progenitor cells in the subventricular zone leads to the continuous generation of new olfactory granule cells (OGCs) throughout life. These cells synaptically integrate into olfactory bulb circuits after ∼2 weeks and transiently exhibit heightened plasticity and responses to novel odors. Although these observations suggest that adult-generated OGCs play important roles in olfactory-related memories, global suppression of olfactory neurogenesis does not typically prevent the formation of odor-reward memories, perhaps because residual OGCs can compensate. Here, we used a transgenic strategy to selectively ablate large numbers of adult-generated OGCs either before or after learning in mice. Consistent with previous studies, pretraining ablation of adult-generated OGCs did not prevent the formation of an odor-reward memory, presumably because existing OGCs can support memory formation in their absence. However, ablation of a similar cohort of adult-generated OGCs after training impaired subsequent memory expression, indicating that if these cells are available at the time of training, they play an essential role in subsequent expression of odor-reward memories. Memory impairment was associated with the loss of adult-generated OGCs that were >10 d in age and did not depend on the developmental stage in which they were generated, suggesting that, once sufficiently mature, OGCs generated during juvenility and adulthood play similar roles in the expression of odor-reward memories. Finally, ablation of adult-generated OGCs 1 month after training did not produce amnesia, indicating that adult-generated OGCs play a time-limited role in the expression of odor-reward memories.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations30
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207