MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380876995 · doi:10.1002/alz.060709

Patterns matter: differential effects of stress‐inducing and novelty‐associated locus coeruleus firing on pretangle tau pathophysiology in a rat model

2023· article· en· W4380876995 on OpenAlexaff
Tamunotonye Omoluabi, Sarah Torraville, Aida Maziar, Abhinaba Ghosh, Kyron D. Power, Camila Rinhardt, Carolyn W. Harley, Qi Yuan

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLocus coeruleusNeurosciencePsychologyPathophysiologyInternal medicineMedicineCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The brainstem locus coeruleus (LC), the main source of brain norepinephrine (NE), is critically involved in several functions including wakefulness, vigilance, attention, learning and memory. LC functioning is firing pattern‐dependent. Phasic pattern promotes novelty and learning, while high tonic activity associates with stress and anxiety. LC has been identified as a key structure in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) development. Braak and colleagues propose that soluble abnormally phosphorylated tau (pretangle tau) originates in the LC early in life. The spreading of pretangle tau to other neuromodulatory areas and transentorhinal cortex constitutes Braak’s pretangle AD stages. Pretangle stages appear to be universal in human, however, only a portion of us develop AD. The selective vulnerability of individuals for AD is not understood. We hypothesized that differential LC activity patterns, influence the pretangle tau pathophysiology and the development of AD. Method In this study, an AAV carrying pseudo‐phosphorylated human tau (AAV9‐DIO‐EGFP‐htauE14) was infused into the LC of 2‐3 month‐old TH‐CRE rats, mimicking the onset of tauopathy during puberty in humans. Another AAV containing ChR2 opsin (AAVdj‐DIO‐ChR2‐mCherry) was co‐infused with htauE14. Chronic light stimulation of the LC of either a 10 Hz phasic pattern or a 25 Hz tonic pattern was carried out for 6 weeks. The performance of ChR2 rats in a battery of behavioral assays was compared with control groups without ChR2 (AAVdj‐DIO‐mCherry), 10 months following the AAV infusion. This was followed by immunohistochemistry and Western blotting comparing different biomarkers. Result Phasic LC activation improved spatial and olfactory discrimination of the htauE14 rats, while chronic tonic activation increased stress level of the rats and led to anhedonia. Phasic pattern rescued axonal degeneration observed in the control htauE14 rats, showing higher density of LC fibers in the piriform cortex and hippocampal dentate gyrus. Tonic LC activation did not rescue LC fiber degeneration, instead, worsened LC neuronal health indexed by elevated level of active caspase 3. The learning performance was positively correlated with the LC fiber density. Conclusion These results argue that variations in environmental experiences associated with differing LC activity patterns may account for individual susceptibility to development of AD in humans.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics researchFrench-language works237,207