Adolescent social stress and social context influence the intake of ethanol and sucrose in male rats soon and long after the stress exposures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social instability stress in adolescent rats (SS; postnatal day 30-45, daily 1 hr isolation +new cage partner) alters behavioural responses to psychostimulants, but differences in voluntary consumption of natural and drug rewards are unknown. SS also is associated with an atypical behavioural repertoire, for example reduced social interactions. Here, we investigated whether SS rats differ from control (CTL) rats in ethanol (EtOH) or sucrose intake in experiments involving different social contexts: alone, in the presence of an unfamiliar peer, in the presence of its cage partner, or in competition against its cage partner. SS rats drank more EtOH than CTL rats irrespective of social context, although the effects were driven primarily by those tested soon after the test procedure rather than weeks later in adulthood. SS and CTL rats did not differ in sucrose intake, except in adulthood under conditions of competition for limited access (SS>CTL). Adolescent rats drank more sucrose than adults, in keeping with evidence that adolescents are more sensitive to natural rewards than adult animals. Overall, adolescent SS modified the reward value of EtOH and sucrose, perhaps through stress/glucocorticoids modifying the development of the mesocorticolimbic system.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".