A comparative study of the performance of individuals with fragile X syndrome and <i>Fmr1</i> knockout mice on Hebb‐Williams mazes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fragile X syndrome (FXS) is the most prevalent form of heritable mental retardation. It arises from a mutation in the FMR1 gene on the X chromosome that interferes with expression of fragile X mental retardation protein (FMRP) and leads to a wide range of behavioural and cognitive deficits. Previous studies have shown a deficit in basic visual perceptual processing as well as spatial abilities in FXS. How such a deficit may impact spatial navigation remains unknown. The current study extended previous research by evaluating spatial learning and memory using both virtual and physical versions of Hebb-Williams mazes, which allows for testing of humans and animals under comparable conditions. We compared the performance of individuals affected by FXS to typically developing individuals of equivalent mental age as well as the performance of Fmr1 knockout mice to wild-type control mice on the same maze problems. In human participants, performance of the comparison group improved across trials, showing expected significant decreases in both errors and latency. In contrast, the performance of the fragile X group remained at similar levels across trials. Although wild-type control mice made significantly fewer errors than the Fmr1 knockout mice, latencies were not statistically different between the groups. These findings suggest that affected humans and mice show similar spatial learning deficits attributable to the lack of FMRP. The implications of these data are discussed including the notion that Hebb-Williams mazes may represent a useful tool to examine the impact of pharmacological interventions on mitigating or reversing the symptoms associated with FXS.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".