MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155549496 · doi:10.15273/pnsis.v47i2.4343

AGE-RELATED CHANGES IN MOTOR ABILITY AND MOTOR LEARNING IN TRIPLE TRANSGENIC (3×TG-AD) AND CONTROL (B6129SF1/J) MICE ON THE ACCELERATING ROTAROD

2013· article· en· W2155549496 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jonathan Oore, Leanne M. Fraser, Richard E. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Nova Scotian Institute of Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholinesterase and Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenetically modified mouseMotor learningRotarod performance testMotor skillPsychologyDiseaseMotor coordinationMedicineInternal medicineTransgeneEndocrinologyNeuroscienceMotor activityBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Student Award-Winning PaperMouse models of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) show both cognitive and neuromotor impairments. We measured motor ability and motor learning of male and female triple transgenic (3×Tg-AD) and control (B6129SF1/J) mice on the accelerating Rotarod in a cross-sectional design at 2, 6, 9, 12, and 15 months of age. At all ages except for 2 months, transgenic mice performed better and had a steeper motor learning curve than controls. Female mice showed better motor performance than males, while males had a steeper learning curve than females. Age did not have a significant main effect on Rotarod performance. However, age and genotype showed an interaction, where the performance of 3×Tg-AD mice peaked at 6 months of age and decreased as age increased. The performance of controls was below that of 3×Tg-AD mice at each age. Behavioural differences seen in the 3×Tg-AD mice may help us to understand the development of neuromotor dysfunction in AD.Keywords: Alzheimer’s disease, Alzheimer models, Amyloid beta, motor ability, motor learning, Rotarod, tau, transgenic, 3×Tg-AD mice

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.737
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Nova Scotian Institute of ScienceSame topicCholinesterase and Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207