Sex and Genotype Differences in Odor Detection in the 3×Tg-AD and 5XFAD Mouse Models of Alzheimer’s Disease at 6 Months of Age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deficits in odor identification and detection are early symptoms of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Two transgenic mouse models of AD, the 5XFAD and the 3×Tg-AD mice and their wildtype controls, were assessed for olfactory detection with decreasing concentrations of ethyl acetate in a go no-go operant olfactometer task at 6 months of age. For both the 5XFAD and their B6SJLF1 wildtype littermates, females made fewer errors in detecting the ethyl acetate than males on all but the lowest odor concentrations. Female 5XFAD mice performed slightly better than their female wildtype littermates on the higher odor concentrations, though not at the lowest concentration. The 3×Tg-AD females showed decreased olfactory detection compared with their wildtype B6129S1 controls, whereas there was no difference in the males. Therefore, although the 5XFAD mice showed no olfactory detection deficits, female 3×Tg-AD mice had impaired olfactory detection at low odor concentrations but males did not. This difference in odor detection should be considered in studies of olfactory learning and memory, as differences in performance may be due to sensory rather than cognitive factors, though detection seems unimpaired at high odor concentrations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".