APOE4 mice rely more on the plasma DHA than APOE3 mice, especially in glia morphology and cognitive performance.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The metabolism of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), an omega‐3 fatty acid, is different in APOE4 carriers. Brain relies on the plasma DHA pool for its need but the plasma‐liver‐brain axis in relation to cognition remains obscure. We hypothesized that this relation is compromised in APOE4 mice considering the differences in fatty acid metabolism between APOE3 and APOE4 mice. Method Male and female APOE3 and APOE4 mice were fed either a diet enriched with DHA (0.7 g DHA/100 g diet) or a control diet for 8 months. Barnes maze and object recognition tests were performed in mice. Immunofluorescence was eprformed on parafin embeded brain slides with GFAP and IBA‐1 and multiplex cytokines were measured in hippocampus protein extracts. Result In the cortex, a genotype effect was found where APOE4 mice had higher concentration of DHA than APOE3 mice fed the control diet. APOE4 mice had 20‐30% lower plasma DHA and arachidonic acid (AA) concentrations, adipose tissue AA concentrations than APOE3 mice, independent of diet. In APOE4 mice, there was a significant correlation between plasma DHA and scores on the Barnes maze and with better recognition index. In addition, APOE4 mice fed the DHA diet had lower hippocampal concentrations of interleukin‐7, lipopolysaccharide‐induced CXC chemokine and monocyte chemoattractant protein 1, and higher concentration of interferon‐gamma compared to APOE4 mice fed the control diet. We also found that a diet rich in DHA enhances reactive astrogliosis and ramified microglia morphology in APOE4 mice. Conclusion Altogether, our data support that APOE4 mice rely more on the plasma DHA than APOE3 mice, especially in cognitive performance and astrocytes and microglia morphology. Any disturbance in plasma DHA metabolism might have a greater impact on cognition in APOE4 carriers.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".