Robust Behavioural Effects in Response to Acute, But Not Repeated, Terpene Administration in Zebrafish (Danio Rerio)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Terpenes are fragrant aromatic compounds produced by a variety of plants, most notably cannabis and hops. With increasing legalization of recreational and medicinal cannabis there is growing interest to better understand the behavioural effects of terpenes and ultimately their therapeutic value. Our study investigated the dose-dependent impact of three terpenes (limonene 0.25, 0.5, 0.75%; β-myrcene 0.001, 0.01, 0.1%; and 0.0001, 0.001, 0.00125% linalool) on zebrafish (Danio rerio) behaviour when exposed both acutely and repeatedly over a 7-day period. Anxiety-like behaviour, boldness, and locomotion were assessed using the open field test and the novel object approach test. In the acute dosing experiment, limonene and β-myrcene treatment groups demonstrated a significant decrease in locomotion, a decrease in anxiety-like behaviour, and an increase in boldness, while linalool treatment groups had minor alterations in locomotion. Moreover, chronic exposure to limonene (0.39%) or β-myrcene (0.0083%) did not result in any significant behavioural effects, suggesting that anxiety-like behaviour, locomotion, and boldness were not impacted at these levels. In conclusion, our study provides support for an anxiolytic and sedative effect in zebrafish in response to acute limonene, β-myrcene, and linalool exposure.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".