Sex‐specific declines in cholinergic‐targeting tRNA fragments in the nucleus accumbens in Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Females with Alzheimer's disease (AD) suffer accelerated dementia and loss of cholinergic neurons compared to males, but the underlying mechanisms are unknown. Seeking causal contributors to both these phenomena, we pursued changes in transfer RNS (tRNA) fragments (tRFs) targeting cholinergic transcripts (CholinotRFs). METHODS: We analyzed small RNA-sequencing (RNA-Seq) data from the nucleus accumbens (NAc) brain region which is enriched in cholinergic neurons, compared to hypothalamic or cortical tissues from AD brains; and explored small RNA expression in neuronal cell lines undergoing cholinergic differentiation. RESULTS: NAc CholinotRFs of mitochondrial genome origin showed reduced levels that correlated with elevations in their predicted cholinergic-associated mRNA targets. Single-cell RNA seq from AD temporal cortices showed altered sex-specific levels of cholinergic transcripts in diverse cell types; inversely, human-originated neuroblastoma cells under cholinergic differentiation presented sex-specific CholinotRF elevations. DISCUSSION: Our findings support CholinotRFs contributions to cholinergic regulation, predicting their involvement in AD sex-specific cholinergic loss and dementia.
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) | 0.002 | 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".