Light alters nociceptive effects of magnetic field shielding in mice: intensity and wavelength considerations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous experiments with mice have shown that repeated 1 hour daily exposure to an ambient magnetic field-shielded environment induces analgesia (antinociception). The exposures were carried out in the dark (less than 2.0x1016 photonss-1m-2) during the mid-light phase of the diurnal cycle. However, if the mice were exposed in the presence of visible light (2.0x1018 photonss-1m-2, 400-750 nm), then the analgesic effects of shielding were eliminated. Here, we show that this effect of light is intensity and wavelength dependent. Introduction of red light (peak at 635 nm) had little or no effect, presumably because mice do not have photoreceptors sensitive to red light above 600 nm in their eyes. By contrast, introduction of ultraviolet light (peak at 405 nm) abolished the effect, presumably because mice do have ultraviolet A receptors. Blue light exposures (peak at 465 nm) of different intensities demonstrate that the effect has an intensity threshold of approximately 12% of the blue light in the housing facility, corresponding to 5x1016 photonss-1m-2 (integral). This intensity is similar to that associated with photoreceptor-based magnetoreception in birds and in mice stimulates photopic/cone vision. Could the detection mechanism that senses ambient magnetic fields in mice be similar to that in bird navigation?
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".