Sex differences in the amplification of responding to an alcohol-predictive cue by an alcohol-associated context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background In male rats, physical contexts that are associated with alcohol can invigorate responding to a discrete, alcohol-predictive conditioned stimulus (CS), and amplify priming-induced reinstatement. Here, we examined these effects as a function of biological sex. Methods Male and female Long-Evans rats were acclimated to drinking ethanol (EtOH, 15% v/v) in their home cages. Next, they were trained to associate an auditory CS (10 s; white noise; 15 trials per session) with EtOH delivery (0.2 ml per CS; 3.0 ml per session) into a fluid port for oral intake. Training occurred in a distinctive context containing specific visual, olfactory, and tactile stimuli. During alternating sessions rats were exposed to a second context where they did not receive EtOH. At test, CS presentations occurred in both contexts without EtOH delivery. Rats then underwent extinction using repeated unreinforced presentations of the CS in both contexts. An alcohol-primed reinstatement test was then conducted, in which 0.2 ml of EtOH was presented both at the start of the session and during the first CS presentation, after which no EtOH was delivered for the remainder of the session. Results At both test and reinstatement, male rats made significantly more CS port-entries in the context associated with alcohol delivery than in the context in which alcohol was never experienced. Unlike males, female rats made a similar number of CS port-entries at test in both the alcohol context and the neutral context. The reinstatement observed in female rats was not affected by context. Conclusions These findings identify novel sex differences in the capacity of an alcohol-associated context to modulate responding to a discrete, alcohol-predictive cue.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.004 | 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".