Longitudinal Assessment of Behaviour and Associated Bio-Markers Following Chronic Consumption of β-Sitosterol β-D-Glucoside in Rats: A Putative Model of Parkinson’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The consumption of cycad (Cycas circinalis) seeds has been linked to the development of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis-Parkinsonism Dementia Complex (ALS-PDC) in humans. ALS-PDC is a clinically variable disease presenting as a combination of symptoms typical of PD and/or ALS. Chronic consumption of β-sitosterol β-D-glucoside (BSSG), a component of the cycad seed, by rats (Rattus norvegicus) has been previously reported to initiate a progressive pathology that develops over several months and manifests as behavioural and histopathological changes that resemble characteristic features of Parkinson’s disease. As part of an independent multi-site validation study, we have tried to replicate and further characterize the BSSG model with a focus on motor function, and associated immunohistochemical markers. Beginning at 3 months of age, male CD® (Sprague Dawley) rats (N = 80) were dosed orally with either a flour pellet or a flour pellet containing BSSG (3 mg) daily (5×/week) for 16 weeks consistent with previous reports of the model. Following BSSG intoxication, separate cohorts of animals (n = 10/treatment) were exposed to a behavioural test battery at 16, 24, 32, or 40 weeks post-initial BSSG feeding. The test battery consisted of the open field test, cylinder test, and ultrasonic vocalization (USV) assessment. No changes in behaviour were observed at any time point. Following behavioural testing, animals were processed for immunohistochemical markers of substantia nigra integrity. Immunohistochemistry of brain tissue revealed no differences in the microglial marker, Iba1, or the dopaminergic integrity marker, tyrosine hydroxylase (TH), in the substantia nigra at any assessment point. The absence of any group differences in behaviour and immunhistochemistry indicates an inability to replicate previous reports. Further investigation into the sources of variability in the model is necessary prior to further utilization of the BSSG model in preclinical studies.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".