Opposing effects of acute and repeated nicotine exposure on boldness in zebrafish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nicotine is an addictive compound that activates neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) and causes behavioural effects that vary with dose, schedule of administration, and animal model. In zebrafish (Danio rerio), acute doses of nicotine have been consistently found to have anxiolytic properties, whereas, chronic exposure elicits anxiogenic effects. To date, however, studies on repeated nicotine administration and the effects of nicotine withdrawal have not been well explored using this model. In this study, we administered nicotine with three different dosing regimens: 1. Single exposures of a "high" dose (25, 50, 100, or 400 mg/L) for 3 minutes. 2. Single exposures to a "low" dose (2.5, 5, or 20 mg/L) for one hour. 3. Repeated one-hour exposure to a "low" dose (2.5, 5, or 20 mg/L) for 21 days. The novel object approach test was used to examine boldness based on the tendency of the fish to explore a novel object. Acutely, nicotine significantly increased the time spent approaching the object with both three-minute and onehour durations of exposure, indicating increased boldness. Conversely, after repeated nicotine exposure for 21 days, fish spent less time approaching the object suggesting a decrease in boldness. Distance moved was unaffected one hour after repeated nicotine exposure, yet decreased after a two-day withdrawal period. Our work suggests that nicotine can have opposing effects on boldness that vary based on dosage and schedule of exposure.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".