Activity in a prefrontal-periaqueductal gray circuit overcomes behavioral and endocrine features of the passive coping stress response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The question of how the brain links behavioral and biological features of defensive responses has remained elusive. The importance of this problem is underscored by the observation that behavioral passivity in stress coping is associated with elevations in glucocorticoid hormones, and each may carry risks for susceptibility to a host of stress-related diseases. Past work implicates the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) in the top-down regulation of stress-related behaviors; however, it is unknown whether such changes have the capacity to buffer against the longer-lasting biological consequences associated with aversive experiences. Using the shock probe defensive burying test in rats to naturalistically measure behavioral and endocrine features of coping, we observed that the active behavioral component of stress coping is associated with increases in activity along a circuit involving the caudal mPFC and midbrain dorsolateral periaqueductal gray (PAG). Optogenetic manipulations of the caudal mPFC-to-dorsolateral PAG pathway bidirectionally modulated active (escape and defensive burying) behaviors, distinct from a rostral mPFC-ventrolateral PAG circuit that instead limited passive (immobility) behavior. Strikingly, under conditions that biased rats toward a passive coping response set, including exaggerated stress hormonal output and increased immobility, excitation of the caudal mPFC-dorsolateral PAG projection significantly attenuated each of these features. These results lend insight into how the brain coordinates response features to overcome passive coping and may be of importance for understanding how activated neural systems promote stress resilience.
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) | 0.000 | 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".