Author response: Sexually dimorphic neuronal responses to social isolation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many species, including humans, use social interaction to reduce the effects of stress. In fact, the lack of a social network may itself be a source of stress. Recent research suggests that young girls are more sensitive to social stress than boys. This could mean that social networks are more important for females in general, and that young females from different species, such as mice, may be more sensitive to social isolation than males. However, few studies have examined how social isolation affects the brain cells that control the release of stress hormones.As such, it remains unknown whether isolating individuals from their social group impacts on the brain in sex-specific ways. Senst, Baimoukhametova et al. now show that the brains of young male and female mice react differently to social isolation. Less than a day after separation from their littermates, the activity in the brain cells of female mice became markedly different from that of isolated males. In contrast to social isolation, the physical stress of being made to swim produced similar changes in the brains of both male and female mice. Further experiments then showed that the changes in the brain cells that control the release of stress hormones required a signalling chemical called corticosterone, which is produced in response to stressful situations. This suggests that, in repsonse to soical isolation, the females are experiencing more stress than the males. Following on from this work, one future challenge will be to investigate if reuniting a social group erases the effects of social isolation on the brain. Further experiments could also examine the behavioural and physiological effects of social isolation, including how females respond to later stressful events.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.350 | 0.097 |
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".