Comparative Neurodevelopment Effects of Bisphenol A and Bisphenol F on Rat Fetal Neural Stem Cell Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bisphenol A (BPA) is considered as one of the most extensively synthesized and used chemicals for industrial and consumer products. Previous investigations have established that exposure to BPA has been linked to developmental, reproductive, cardiovascular, immune, and metabolic effects. Several jurisdictions have imposed restrictions and/or have banned the use of BPA in packaging material and other consumer goods. Hence, manufacturers have replaced BPA with its analogues that have a similar chemical structure. Some of these analogues have shown similar endocrine effects as BPA, while others have not been assessed. In this investigation, we compared the neurodevelopmental effects of BPA and its major replacement Bisphenol F (BPF) on rat fetal neural stem cells (rNSCs). rNSCs were exposed to cell-specific differentiation media with non-cytotoxic doses of BPA or BPF at the range of 0.05 M to 100 M concentrations and measured the degree of cell proliferation, differentiation, and morphometric parameters. Both of these compounds increased cell proliferation and impacted the differentiation rates of oligodendrocytes and neurons, in a concentration-dependent manner. Further, there were concentration-dependent decreases in the maturation of oligodendrocytes and neurons, with a concomitant increase in immature oligodendrocytes and neurons. In contrast, neither BPA nor BPF had any overall effect on cellular proliferation or the cytotoxicity of astrocytes. However, there was a concentration-dependent increase in astrocyte differentiation and morphological changes. Morphometric analysis for the astrocytes, oligodendrocytes, and neurons showed a reduction in the arborization. These data show that fetal rNSCs exposed to either BPA or BPF lead to comparable changes in the cellular differentiation, proliferation, and arborization processes.
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".