Dual Cannabinoid and Orexin Regulation of Anhedonic Behaviour Caused by Prolonged Restraint Stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The endocannabinoid and orexin systems share many biological functions, including wakefulness, stress response, reward processing, and mood. While these systems work against one another with respect to arousal, chronic stress-induced downregulation of both systems often leads to anhedonia or the inability to experience pleasure from natural rewards. In the current study, a 24 h restraint stress test (24 h RST) reduced sucrose preference in adult male and female C57BL/6 mice. Prior to the stressor, subsets of mice were intraperitoneally administered cannabinoid and orexin receptor agonists, antagonists, and combinations of these drugs. Restraint mice that received the cannabinoid receptor type 1 (CB1R) antagonist SR141716A, orexin receptor type 2 (OX2R) agonist YNT-185, and the combination of SR141716A and YNT-185, exhibited less anhedonia compared to vehicle/control mice. Thus, the 24 h RST likely decreased orexin signaling, which was then restored by YNT-185. Receptor colocalization analysis throughout mesocorticolimbic brain regions revealed increased CB1R-OX1R colocalization from SR141716A and YNT-185 treatments. Although a previous study from our group showed additive cataleptic effects between CP55,940 and the dual orexin receptor antagonist (TCS-1102), the opposite combination of pharmacological agents proved additive for sucrose preference. Taken together, these results reveal more of the complex interactions between the endocannabinoid and orexin systems.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".