Untangling the Influences of Voluntary Running, Environmental Complexity, Social Housing and Stress on Adult Hippocampal Neurogenesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental enrichment (EE) exerts powerful effects on brain physiology, and is widely used as an experimental and therapeutic tool. Typical EE paradigms are multifactorial, incorporating elements of physical exercise, environmental complexity, social interactions and stress, however the specific contributions of these variables have not been separable using conventional housing paradigms. Here, we evaluated the impacts of these individual variables on adult hippocampal neurogenesis by using a novel "Alternating EE" paradigm. For 4 weeks, adult male CD1 mice were alternated daily between two enriched environments; by comparing groups that differed in one of their two environments, the individual and combinatorial effects of EE variables could be resolved. The Alternating EE paradigm revealed that (1) voluntary running for 3 days/week was sufficient to increase both mitotic and post-mitotic stages of hippocampal neurogenesis, confirming the central importance of exercise; (2) a complex environment (comprised of both social interactions and rotated inanimate objects) had no effect on neurogenesis itself, but enhanced depolarization-induced c-Fos expression (attributable to social interactions) and buffered stress-induced plasma corticosterone levels (attributable to inanimate objects); and (3) neither social isolation, group housing, nor chronically increased levels of plasma corticosterone had a prolonged impact on neurogenesis. Mouse strain, handling and type of running apparatus were tested and excluded as potential confounding factors. These findings provide valuable insights into the relative effects of key EE variables on adult neurogenesis, and this "Alternating EE" paradigm represents a useful tool for exploring the contributions of individual EE variables to mechanisms of neural plasticity.
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".