Amyloid Beta and Tau Cooperate to Cause Reversible Behavioral and Transcriptional Deficits in a Model of Alzheimer’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A key knowledge gap blocking development of effective therapeutics for Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the lack of understanding of how amyloid beta (Aβ) peptide and pathological forms of the tau protein cooperate in causing disease phenotypes. Within a mouse tau-deficient background, we probed the molecular, cellular, and behavioral disruption triggered by the influence of wild-type human tau on human Aβ-induced pathology. We find that Aβ and tau work cooperatively to cause a hyperactivity behavioral phenotype and to cause downregulation of transcription of genes involved in synaptic function. In both our mouse model and human postmortem tissue, we observe accumulation of pathological tau in synapses, supporting the potential importance of synaptic tau. Importantly, tau reduction in the mice initiated after behavioral deficits emerge corrects behavioral deficits, reduces synaptic tau levels, and substantially reverses transcriptional perturbations, suggesting that lowering synaptic tau levels may be beneficial in AD.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".