Circadian Clock Gene Expression in Brain Regions of Alzheimer ’s Disease Patients and Control Subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Circadian oscillators have been observed throughout the rodent brain. In the human brain, rhythmic expression of clock genes has been reported only in the pineal gland, and little is known about their expression in other regions. The investigators sought to determine whether clock gene expression could be detected and whether it varies as a function of time of day in the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BNST) and cingulate cortex, areas known to be involved in decision making and motivated behaviors, as well as in the pineal gland, in the brains of Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients and aged controls. Relative expression levels of PERIOD1 (PER1 ), PERIOD2 (PER2), and Brain and muscle Arnt-like protein-1 (BMAL1) were detected by quantitative PCR in all 3 brain regions. A harmonic regression model revealed significant 24-h rhythms of PER1 in the BNST of AD subjects. A significant rhythm of PER2 was found in the cingulate cortex and BNST of control subjects and in all 3 regions of AD patients. In controls, BMAL1 did not show a diurnal rhythm in the cingulate cortex but significantly varied with time of death in the pineal and BNST and in all 3 regions for AD patients. Notable differences in the phase of clock gene rhythms and phase relationships between genes and regions were observed in the brains of AD compared to those of controls. These results indicate the presence of multiple circadian oscillators in the human brain and suggest altered synchronization among these oscillators in the brain of AD patients.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".