Differential Effects of a Nap on Motor Sequence Learning-Related Functional Connectivity Between Young and Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
sleep degrade with age. It is known that brain activity in hippocampal-cortical-striatal areas is important for sleep-dependent, off-line consolidation of motor-sequences. Yet, the intricacies of how both age and sleep alter communication within this network of brain areas, which facilitate consolidation, are not known. In this study, 37 young (age 20-35) and 49 older individuals (age 55-75) underwent resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) before and after training on a MSL task as well as after either a nap or a period of awake rest. Young participants who napped showed strengthening of functional connectivity (FC) between motor, striatal, and hippocampal areas, compared to older subjects regardless of sleep condition. Follow-up analyses revealed this effect was driven by younger participants who showed an increase in FC between striatum and motor cortices, as well as older participants who showed decreased FC between the hippocampus, striatum, and precuneus. Therefore, different effects of sleep were observed in younger vs. older participants, where young participants primarily showed increased communication in the striatal-motor areas, while older participants showed decreases in key nodes of the default mode network and striatum. Performance gains correlated with FC changes in young adults, and this association was much greater in participants who napped compared to those who stayed awake. Performance gains also correlated with FC changes in older adults, but only in those who napped. This study reveals that, while there is no evidence of time-dependent forgetting/deterioration of performance, older adults exhibit a completely different pattern of FC changes during consolidation compared to younger adults, and lose the benefit that sleep affords to memory consolidation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".