Vape flavourants dull sensory perception and cause hyperactivity in developing zebrafish embryos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
to be exposed to chemical constituents in the vape. Vapes come in over 7000 unique flavours with and without nicotine, and while nicotine is a known neurotoxicant, the effects of vape flavouring alone, in the absence of nicotine, on brain function are not well understood. Here, we performed a screen of vape aerosol extracts (VAEs) to determine the potential for prenatal neurotoxicity using the zebrafish embryo photomotor response (PMR)-a translational biosensor of neurobehavioural effects. We screened three commonly used aerosolized vape liquids (flavoured and flavourless) either with or without nicotine. No neurobehavioural effects were detected in flavourless, nicotine-free VAEs, while the addition of nicotine to this VAE dulled sensory perception. Flavoured nicotine-free VAEs also dulled sensory perception and caused hyperactivity in zebrafish embryos. The combination of flavour and nicotine produced largely additive effects. Flavoured VAEs without nicotine had similar neuroactive potency to nicotine. Together, using zebrafish PMR as a high throughput translational behavioural model for prenatal exposure, our results demonstrate that e-cigarette flavourants that we screened elicit neurobehavioural effects worthy of further investigation for long-term neurotoxic potential and also have the potential to modulate nicotine impact on the developing brain.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".