MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133381675 · doi:10.1002/hipo.20157

Environmental enrichment and voluntary exercise massively increase neurogenesis in the adult hippocampus via dissociable pathways

2006· review· en· W2133381675 on OpenAlexaff
Andrea K. Olson, Brennan D. Eadie, Carl Ernst, Brian R. Christie

Bibliographic record

VenueHippocampus · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurogenesisDentate gyrusHippocampal formationEnvironmental enrichmentNeuroscienceHippocampusPsychologyProgenitor cellNeuroplasticityBiologyStem cellCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Environmental enrichment (EE) and voluntary exercise (VEx) have consistently been shown to increase adult hippocampal neurogenesis and improve spatial learning ability. Although it appears that these two manipulations are equivalent in this regard, evidence exists that EE and VEx affect different phases of the neurogenic process in distinct ways. We review the data suggesting that EE increases the likelihood of survival of new cells, whereas VEx increases the level of proliferation of progenitor cells. We then outline the factors that may mediate these relationships. Finally, we provide a model showing that VEx leads to the convergence of key somatic and cerebral factors in the dentate gyrus (DG) to induce cell proliferation. Although insufficient evidence exists to provide a similar model for EE, we suggest that EE-induced cell survival in the DG involves cortical restructuring as a means of promoting survival. We conclude that EE and VEx lead to an increase in overall hippocampal neurogenesis via dissociable pathways, and should therefore, be considered distinct interventions with regard to hippocampal plasticity and associated behaviors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations569
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHippocampusSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207