Radical pairs may explain reactive oxygen species-mediated effects of hypomagnetic field on neurogenesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Exposures to a hypomagnetic field can affect biological processes. Recently, it has been observed that hypomagnetic field exposure can adversely affect adult hippocampal neurogenesis and hippocampus-dependent cognition in mice. In the same study, the role of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in hypomagnetic field effects has been demonstrated. However, the mechanistic reasons behind this effect are not clear. This study proposes a radical pair mechanism based on a flavin-superoxide radical pair to explain the modulation of ROS production and the attenuation of adult hippocampal neurogenesis in a hypomagnetic field. The results of our calculations favor a singlet-born radical pair over a triplet-born radical pair. Our model predicts hypomagnetic field effects on the triplet/singlet yield of comparable strength as the effects observed in experimental studies on adult hippocampal neurogenesis. Our predictions are also in qualitative agreement with experimental results on superoxide concentration and other observed ROS effects. We also predict the effects of applied magnetic fields and oxygen isotopic substitution on adult hippocampal neurogenesis. Our findings strengthen the idea that nature might harness quantum resources in the context of the brain. Author summary Exposure to magnetic fields influences many neurobiological processes. The formation of new neurons (neurogenesis) in the hippocampal region of the adult brain plays a crucial role in learning and memory. It can be adversely affected by shielding the earth’s magnetic field, and this effect is intimately related to ROS concentration. In this study, we have developed a quantum mechanical model to explain this magnetic field dependence of adult hippocampal neurogenesis. Our model is also consistent with the observed ROS effects.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".