No food for thought: an intermediate level of food deprivation enhances memory in <i>Lymnaea stagnalis</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nutritional status plays an important role in cognitive functioning, but there is disagreement on the role that food deprivation plays in learning and memory. In this study, we investigated the behavioral and transcriptional effects induced by different lengths of food deprivation: 1 day, which is a short time period of food deprivation, and 3 days, which is an 'intermediate' level of food deprivation. Snails were subjected to different feeding regimens and then trained for operant conditioning of aerial respiration, where they received a single 0.5 h training session followed by a long-term memory (LTM) test 24 h later. Immediately after the memory test, snails were killed and the expression levels of key genes for neuroplasticity, energy balance and stress response were measured in the central ring ganglia. We found that 1 day of food deprivation was not sufficient to enhance snails' LTM formation and subsequently did not result in any significant transcriptional effects. However, 3 days of food deprivation resulted in enhanced LTM formation and caused the upregulation of neuroplasticity and stress-related genes and the downregulation of serotonin-related genes. These data provide further insight into how nutritional status and related molecular mechanisms impact cognitive function.
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".