Blockade of Mineralocorticoid and Glucocorticoid Receptors Reverses Stress-Induced Motor Impairments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Stress and glucocorticoids can influence movement performance and pathologies of the motor system. The classic notion assumes that the glucocorticoid receptor (GR) mediates the majority of stress-induced behavioral changes. Nevertheless, recent findings have attributed a more prominent role to the mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) in modulating behavior. The purpose of this study was to dissociate the impact of MR versus GR activation in movement and stress-associated motor disruption. METHODS: Groups of male and female rats were tested in skilled reaching and open field behavior and treated peri-orally with either agonists or antagonists for MR and GR, respectively. RESULTS: Selective acute activation of MR (aldosterone) and GR (dexamethasone) decreased movement success with a magnitude similar to stress-induced impairment in male and female animals. By contrast, antagonist treatment to block MR (RU-28318) or GR (Mifepristone, RU-486) prevented motor impairments caused by acute restraint stress or corticosterone treatment. Moreover, both antagonists reversed chronic stress- and glucocorticoid-induced motor impairments to values comparable to baseline levels. Higher success rates in treated animals were accompanied by improved performance of skilled limb movements. In addition, combined treatment with MR and GR antagonists had additive benefit on aim and advance towards the reaching target. CONCLUSION: These observations suggest that MR or GR equally influence motor system function with partially synergistic effects. Males and females show comparable responses to MR and GR activation or blockade. The need for balanced activation of MRs and GRs in motor control requires consideration in intervention strategies to improve performance in health and disease.
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".