Elevated Plus Maze Test Combined with Video Tracking Software to Investigate the Anxiolytic Effect of Exogenous Ketogenic Supplements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The overall goal of this study is to describe the methodology of the elevated plus maze (EPM) test in combination with a video tracking software. The purpose of the method is to document the effect of various potential anxiolytic treatments on laboratory rodent models. The EPM test is based on the rodents' proclivity toward protected, enclosed dark spaces and unconditioned fear of open spaces and heights, and their innate intense motivation to explore novel environments. The EPM test is a widely used behavioral test for investigating the anxiolytic or anxiogenic responses of rodents given drugs that are known to affect behavior. Observation demonstrating a decreased proportion of time spent on closed arms, an increased proportion of time spent on open arms, a reduced number of entries to closed arms, and an elevated number of entries to open arms measured by the EPM test may reflect reduced anxiety levels. Using this method, the effect of exogenous ketone supplements on anxiety-related behavior is tested in Sprague Dawley (SPD) rats. Exogenous ketone supplements are chronically fed to the rats for 83 days or subchronically and acutely orally gavaged, daily for 7 days, before conducting the EPM test. Behavioral data collection is performed using the SMART video tracking system by a blinded observer at the end of the treatments. The main findings indicate that the EPM test is an effective method to detect the ketone supplement-induced anxiolytic effect and can be considered a sensitive measure to assess changes in anxiety behavior associated with drug- or metabolic-based therapies.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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".