The regulation of adult rodent hippocampal neurogenesis by deep brain stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To examine the influence of deep brain stimulation on hippocampal neurogenesis in an adult rodent model. METHODS: Rats were anesthetized and treated for 1 hour with electrical stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (AN) or sham surgery. The animals were injected with 5'-bromo-2'-deoxyuridine (BrdU) 1-7 days after surgery and killed 24 hours or 28 days later. The authors counted the BrdU-positive cells in the dentate gyrus (DG) of the hippocampus. To investigate the fate of these cells, they also stained sections for doublecortin, NeuN, and GFAP and analyzed the results with confocal microscopy. In a second set of experiments they assessed the number of DG BrdU-positive cells in animals treated with corticosterone (a known suppressor of hippocampal neurogenesis) and sham surgery, corticosterone and AN stimulation, or vehicle and sham surgery. RESULTS: Animals receiving AN high-frequency stimulation (2.5 V, 90 musec, 130 Hz) had a 2- to 3-fold increase in the number of DG BrdU-positive cells compared with nonstimulated controls. This increase was not seen with stimulation at 10 Hz. Most BrdU-positive cells assumed a neuronal cell fate. As expected, treatment with corticosterone significantly reduced the number of DG BrdU-positive cells. This steroid-induced reduction of neurogenesis was reversed by AN stimulation. CONCLUSIONS: High-frequency stimulation of the AN increases the hippocampal neurogenesis and restores experimentally suppressed neurogenesis. Interventions that increase hippocampal neurogenesis have been associated with enhanced behavioral performance. In this context, it may be possible to use electrical stimulation to treat conditions associated with impairment of hippocampal function.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".