Characterization of the neurogenesis quiescent zone in the rodent brain: Effects of age and exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although it is accepted that new neurons continue to be generated in the hippocampal dentate gyrus (DG) throughout adulthood, it has recently become apparent that this process is not homogeneous, and that a small region of the DG lacks neurogenesis. Here, we show that the relative area of this neurogenesis quiescent zone (NQZ) did not vary after the peak in hippocampal postnatal neurogenesis and until animals reached adulthood, although the ratio between its actual volume and the total volume of the DG doubled during this time. However, we were able to identify a few mitotic cells that reside within this subregion in early adolescent rats. Furthermore, these cells can be activated, and 1 week of voluntary exercise was enough to significantly increase the number of mitotic cells within the NQZ of adolescent rats. There was, however, no corresponding increase in the number of new neurons in this subregion of the DG, suggesting that some factor necessary to allow these cells to develop into a mature phenotype is missing. Moreover, the same intervention was ineffective in increasing either proliferation or neurogenesis in older adult rats. Surprisingly, we found no evidence for the existence of an NQZ in the mouse DG, suggesting that the neurogenic process in these two rodent species is differently regulated. Understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying the existence of the NQZ in the rat DG might shed light on the processes that regulate adult neurogenesis and its modulation by factors such as aging and exercise.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".