Modulation of motor function by stress: a novel concept of the effects of stress and corticosterone on behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stress and stress hormones affect a variety of behaviors and cognitive abilities. The influences of stress and glucocorticoids on motor function, however, have not been characterized although the presence of glucocorticoid receptors in the motor system has been documented. Here we demonstrate that stress and the stress hormone corticosterone influence motor system function in rats. Groups of adult female Long-Evans rats underwent either a daily stress-inducing procedure (immobilization or swimming in cold water) or oral corticosterone treatment. While these treatments continued, animals were tested in skilled reaching and skilled walking tasks for a period of 2 weeks. Both acute (day 1) and chronic (day 14) stress and corticosterone treatment reduced skilled movement accuracy in reaching and walking and increased performance speed. Furthermore, both chronic stress and chronic corticosterone treatment altered skilled movement patterns in the reaching task. These findings indicate that stress modulates motor system function and that these effects are partially mediated by glucocorticoids. To examine whether stress-induced changes might also derive from enhanced emotionality, rats were treated with the benzodiazepine diazepam. Based on an inverted U-shaped dose-response relationship, a moderate dose of diazepam significantly improved reaching success while at the same time reducing corticosterone levels. Thus, stress-associated emotional responses such as anxiety might account for diminished movement accuracy. These results suggest that stress affects the motor system both directly via hormonal changes and indirectly via changes in emotionality. These findings are discussed with respect to the role of stress in motor system function and movement disorders.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".