Differential Effects of Nicotine and Complex Housing on Subsequent Experience-Dependent Structural Plasticity in the Nucleus Accumbens.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drugs and other forms of experience (e.g., complex housing) share the ability to alter the dendritic fields of cortical and subcortical neurons. Although such modifications are typically considered advantageous, recent research has demonstrated that psychomotor stimulants (cocaine and amphetamine) block subsequent experience-dependent structural plasticity in the nucleus accumbens (NAcc) and parietal neocortex. The authors investigated whether these findings generalize to another commonly used stimulant (nicotine) and further asked whether prior experience blocks subsequent nicotine-related structural plasticity. Rats were given daily injections of nicotine (or saline) for 14 days either before (Experiment 1) or after (Experiment 2) 2.5-3.0 months of complex (or standard) housing. Nicotine blocked housing-related increases in dendritic branching, length, spine density, and total spines in NAcc; however, complex housing did not block the effects of nicotine. The findings indicate that there are important differences in the capacity of drugs and experience to influence subsequent modifications in dendritic structure.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it