Effects of cannabidiol and Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol in the elevated plus maze in mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study tested the effects of cannabidiol (CBD) alone, Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) alone, and CBD and THC in combination (15:1 ratio) in the elevated plus maze (EPM), a test useful for the study of anxiety. In dose-response studies, adult, male CD1 mice were injected intraperitoneally with (1) CBD alone (0-96 mg/kg), (2) THC alone (0-6.4 mg/kg) or (3) CBD+THC in a 15:1 combination (0.0 + 0.0 mg/kg to 96.0 + 6.4 mg/kg). Diazepam (2.5 mg/kg) was also tested as a positive control. It was found that diazepam significantly increased open arm time in the EPM. CBD alone had no significant effect at any dose or injection-test interval. THC alone, however, caused a significant increase in open arm time at 3.2 and 6.4 mg/kg - doses which did not affect locomotion as measured by closed-arm entries. The effect of the combination of CBD and THC was not significantly different than the effect of THC alone. CBD alone did not have anxiolytic-like effects. THC had anxiolytic-like effects at nontoxic doses. No interaction between THC and CBD was seen when the two were combined.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".