Proximate causes and consequences of intergenerational influences of salient sensory experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Salient sensory environments experienced by a parental generation can exert intergenerational influences on offspring. 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 previously showed that exposing male mice to a salient olfactory experience, like olfactory fear conditioning, resulted in offspring demonstrating a sensitivity to the odor used to condition the paternal generation and possessing 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 adults that developed from these embryos had 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 consolidation of a weak single-trial Odor A + shock fear conditioning protocol. 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 offspring. In so doing, our study of intergenerational influences of parental sensory experience adds to existing literature on intergenerational influences of parental exposures to stress and dietary manipulations and suggests that some causes (sperm RNA) and consequences (behavioral flexibility) of intergenerational influences of parental experiences may be conserved across a variety of parental 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".