Stimulation of Entorhinal Cortex Promotes Adult Neurogenesis and Facilitates Spatial Memory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an established therapeutic modality for the treatment of movement disorders and an emerging therapeutic approach for the treatment of disorders of mood and thought. For example, recently we have shown that DBS of the fornix may ameliorate cognitive decline associated with dementia. However, like other applications of DBS, the mechanisms mediating these clinical effects are unknown. As DBS modulates neurophysiological activity in targeted brain regions, DBS might influence cognitive function via activity-dependent regulation of hippocampal neurogenesis. Using stimulation parameters analogous to clinical high-frequency DBS, here we addressed this question in mice. We found that acute stimulation of the entorhinal cortex (EC) transiently promoted proliferation in the dentate gyrus (DG). Cells generated as a consequence of stimulation differentiated into neurons, survived for at least several weeks, and acquired normal dentate granule cell (DGC) morphology. Importantly, stimulation-induced promotion of neurogenesis was limited to the DG and not associated with changes in apoptotic cell death. Using immunohistochemical approaches, we found that, once sufficiently mature, these stimulation-induced neurons integrated into hippocampal circuits supporting water-maze memory. Finally, formation of water-maze memory was facilitated 6 weeks (but not 1 week) after bilateral stimulation of the EC. The delay-dependent nature of these effects matches the maturation-dependent integration of adult-generated DGCs into dentate circuits supporting water-maze memory. Furthermore, because the beneficial effects of EC stimulation were prevented by blocking neurogenesis, this suggests a causal relationship between stimulation-induced promotion of adult neurogenesis and enhanced spatial memory.
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".