Proximate causes and consequences of intergenerational influences of salient sensory experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Salient sensory environments experienced by a parental generation can exert intergenerational influences on offspring, including offspring not conceived at the time of the parental experience. While these data provide an exciting new perspective on biological inheritance, questions remain about causes and consequences of intergenerational influences of salient sensory experience. We have previously shown that exposing male mice to a salient olfactory experience like olfactory fear conditioning results in offspring demonstrating a sensitivity to the odor used to condition the paternal generation and possessing an enhanced neuroanatomical representation for that odor. In this study, we first injected RNA extracted from sperm of male mice that underwent olfactory fear conditioning into naïve single cell zygotes and found that both male and female adults that develop from these embryos have increased sensitivity and enhanced neuroanatomical representation for the odor (Odor A) with which the paternal male had been conditioned. Next, we found that female, but not male offspring sired by males conditioned with Odor A show enhanced freezing when presented with Odor A after being exposed to a sub-threshold olfactory fear conditioning protocol that consisted of only a single Odor A + shock pairing. Our data provide evidence that RNA found in the paternal germline after exposure to salient sensory experiences can contribute to intergenerational influences of such experiences, and that such intergenerational influences confer an element of adaptation to the filial generation. In so doing, our work suggests that some causes (sperm RNA) and consequences (behavioral flexibility) of intergenerational influences of parental experiences are conserved across experiences as diverse as stressors, dietary manipulations, and sensory experiences.
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".