Rats anticipate damaged rungs on the elevated ladder: Applications for rodent models of Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study examined rats' ability to anticipate undetectable wider gaps between rungs produced when they stepped on and dislodged damaged rungs while they traversed a slightly inclined elevated ladder. Rats in the first of three experiments reduced running speeds when they encountered four evenly spaced damaged rungs either always placed on the first or second half of the ladder (the break-a-way (BW) phase) but quickly recovered to their baseline (BL) levels when damaged rungs where replaced with intact rungs (the recovery phase). Rats previously exposed to damaged rungs over the first half of the ladder increased their speeds above BL on its second "safer" half during the recovery phase, a delayed "relief-like" positive contrast effect. In Experiment 2, other rats decreased their speeds more as they approached a single damaged rung at a fixed location when it occurred before than after the mid-point of the ladder. Although they quickly recovered to BL speeds on the portion of the ladder after the damaged rung or replaced intact rung, they never showed any "relief-like"/escape effects. Rats also reduced their likelihood of dislodging the damaged rung with a fore paw over extended BW training. In the third experiment rats encountered a more easily dislodged damaged rung that was signaled by a closer intact rung on half the trials. Under these conditions rats displayed a more reliable positive contrast "relief-like" effect. We discussed how traditional associative and cognitive theories of aversive conditioning account for these findings and their relationship to normal changes in dopamine production and possible effects of reduced production from the substantia nigra pars compacta (SNpc) in the Basal ganglia in rodent models of Parkinson's disease.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".