Benzothiazole Amphiphiles Promote the Formation of Dendritic Spines in Primary Hippocampal Neurons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The majority of excitatory synapses in the brain exist on dendritic spines. Accordingly, the regulation of dendritic spine density in the hippocampus is thought to play a central role in learning and memory. The development of novel methods to control spine density could, therefore, have important implications for treatment of a host of neurodegenerative and developmental cognitive disorders. Herein, we report the design and evaluation of a new class of benzothiazole amphiphiles that exhibit a dose-dependent response leading to an increase in dendritic spine density in primary hippocampal neurons. Cell exposure studies reveal that the increase in spine density can persist for days in the presence of these compounds, but returns to normal spine density levels within 24 h when the compounds are removed, demonstrating the capability to reversibly control spinogenic activity. Time-lapse imaging of dissociated hippocampal neuronal cultures shows that these compounds promote a net increase in spine density through the formation of new spines. Biochemical studies support that promotion of spine formation by these compounds is accompanied by Ras activation. These spinogenic molecules were also capable of inhibiting a suspected mechanism for dendritic spine loss induced by Alzheimer-related aggregated amyloid-β peptides in primary neurons. Evaluation of this new group of spinogenic agents reveals that they also exhibit relatively low toxicity at concentrations displaying activity. Collectively, these results suggest that small molecules that promote spine formation could be potentially useful for ameliorating cognitive deficiencies associated with spine loss in neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer disease, and may also find use as general cognitive enhancers.
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".