Maternal music exposure during pregnancy influences reflexive motor behaviors in mice offspring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence supports that music can modulate many physiological roles, exerting clear effects on the central nervous system. For this effect to be positive, music should be tuned at a frequency of 432 Hz. This study aims to determine the effects of prenatal exposure to music on reflexive motor behaviors in mice offspring. Six pregnant female NMRI mice (8-10 weeks old) were randomly and equally allocated into two groups. Group 1 as control was placed in a normal housing area (average room noise 35 dB), and Group 2 was exposed to music pitched at 432 Hz for 2 h a day played at constant volume (75/80 dB) during pregnancy. Following delivery, four pups from each pregnant mouse were selected, and reflexive motor behaviors including ambulation, hind-limb foot angle, surface righting, grip strength, front- and hind-limb suspension, and negative geotaxis were determined. Based on the findings, prenatal exposure to music significantly increased ambulation score, grip strength, and front- and hind-limb suspension compared to the control group (P < 0.05). Also, prenatal exposure to music significantly decreased hind-limb foot angle, negative geotaxis, and surface righting compared to the control group (P < 0.05). These results suggested that music exposure during pregnancy had a significant positive effect on all tested reflexive motor behaviors in mice offspring.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".