MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945663208 · doi:10.1080/09291016.2019.1616454

Hippocampal-dependent memory retention is unaffected by a T21 light–dark cycle in female Fischer brown Norway rats

2019· article· en· W2945663208 on OpenAlexafffund
Scott H. Deibel, Nancy S. Hong, Kevan Moore, Tyler Mysyk, Robert J. McDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Rhythm Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCircadian rhythm and melatonin
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsHippocampal formationDark chocolateInternal medicineEndocrinologyBiologyChemistryNeuroscienceMedicineFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study investigated circadian rhythms and hippocampal-dependent memory in female Fischer brown Norway rats. As in past reports with female Long Evans rats, we hypothesized that six days of exposure to an unentrainable T21 light–dark cycle that occurred during distributed Morris water task training would not impair the retention of the acquired memory. As expected, the rats did not have impaired retention of the place memory acquired in the distributed Morris water task. We next, quantified circadian entrainment two months after exposure to the T21 cycle. As expected, measures of circadian rhythms suggested that the rats exposed to the T21 had since entrained to a 12:12 light–dark cycle. To confirm that the T21 paradigm induces free-running circadian rhythms in female Fischer brown Norway rats, the control animals were subjected to the same T21 paradigm and circadian rhythms were continuously measured. Signs of free-running circadian rhythms were present during T21 exposure such as delayed phase of entrainment, elongated period, and decreased activity during the dark phase of the cycle. To our knowledge, this is one of the first characterization of activity rhythms in Fischer brown Norway rats.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.015

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.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological Rhythm ResearchSame topicCircadian rhythm and melatoninFrench-language works237,207