P1‐090: EFFECT OF REPEATED FOCUSED ULTRASOUND TREATMENTS ON THE DAILY LIVING ACTIVITIES OF THE TGCRND8 MOUSE MODEL OF ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Focused ultrasound (FUS) treatments used to temporarily increase the permeability of the blood-brain barrier decreases β-amyloid plaque load and improves memory functions in animal models of Alzheimer's disease (AD) (Burgess et al. 2014, Leinenga and Gotz 2015, Nisbet et al. 2017, Alecou et al. 2017, Karakatsani et al. 2017). The effects of FUS treatments on stereotypical animal behavior have not been investigated. In this study, the effects of repeated FUS treatments on the daily living activities of AD mice were evaluated using the marble burying and nesting tasks (Deacon 2006a, b), and open field test. Seven-month-old TgCRND8 animals were split into three groups: transgenic FUS (‘Tg FUS’, n = 4), non-transgenic control (‘nTg CTL’, n = 5), and non-transgenic control (‘nTg CTL’, n = 6). Tg FUS animals were given three to five biweekly FUS treatments over ten weeks. To access marble burying behaviour, ten glass marbles were placed in bedding, and the number of buried marbles was assessed after 30 mins. To assess nesting behavior, mice were placed in a clean cage with one nestlet, and nest quality was evaluated at one, three, six, and 24 h. To assess locomotion using the open field test, mice were placed in a clean mouse cage with opaque walls for 15 min. In the marble burying task, Tg FUS performed significantly worse than nTg CTL animals. In the nesting task, Tg FUS animals performed significantly worse than nTg FUS and nTg CTL groups at all timepoints. In the open field test, Tg FUS animals covered significantly more distance than nTg CTL animals. Burrowing performance of Tg FUS and nTg FUS animals do not differ significantly, suggesting that repeated FUS treatments do not substantially affect the abilities of old AD compared to WT mice. In addition, Tg FUS animals exhibit a steady improvement in nesting score, suggesting that Tg FUS animals may require more time to achieve a better nest. Although Tg FUS animals exhibited worse scores than nTg CTL animals, such challenges in performing activities of daily living are typical in AD patients.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".