What Goes Around Can Come Around: An Unexpected Deleterious Effect of Using Mouse Running Wheels for Environmental Enrichment.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental enrichment items such as running wheels can promote the wellbeing of laboratory mice. Growing evidence suggests that wheel running simulates exercise effects in many mouse models of human conditions, but this activity also might change other aspects of mouse behavior. In this case study, we show that the presence of running wheels leads to pronounced and permanent circling behavior with route-tracing in a proportion of the male mice of a genetically distinct cohort. The genetic background of this cohort includes a mutation in Arhgap19, but genetic crosses showed that an unknown second-site mutation likely caused the induced circling behavior. Behavioral tests for inner-ear function indicated a normal sense of gravity in the circling mice. However, the levels of dopamine, serotonin, and some dopamine metabolites were lower in the brains of circling male mice than in mice of the same genetic background that were weaned without wheels. Circling was seen in both singly and socially housed male mice. The additional stress of fighting may have exacerbated the predisposition to circling in the socially housed animals. Singly and socially housed male mice without wheels did not circle. Our current findings highlight the importance and possibly confounding nature of the environmental and genetic background in mouse behavioral studies, given that the circling behavior and alterations in dopamine and serotonin levels in this mouse cohort occurred only when the male mice were housed with running wheels.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it