Exploring the parity paradox: Differential effects on neuroplasticity and neuroinflammation by APOEe4 genotype at middle-age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Female sex and Apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 genotype are top non-modifiable risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Although female-unique experiences like parity (pregnancy and motherhood) have positive effects on neuroplasticity at middle age, previous pregnancy may also contribute to AD risk. To explore these seemingly paradoxical long-term effects of parity, we investigated the impact of parity with APOEε4 genotype by examining behavioural and neural biomarkers of brain health in middle-aged female rats. Our findings show that primiparous (parous one time) hAPOEε4 rats display increased use of a non-spatial cognitive strategy and exhibit decreased number and recruitment of new-born neurons in the ventral dentate gyrus of the hippocampus in response to spatial working memory retrieval. Furthermore, primiparity and hAPOEε4 genotype synergistically modulate neuroinflammatory markers in the ventral hippocampus. Collectively, these findings demonstrate that previous parity in hAPOEε4 rats confers an added risk to present with reduced activity and engagement of the hippocampus as well as elevated pro-inflammatory signaling, and underscores the importance of considering female-specific factors and genotype in health research. Highlights hAPOEε4 rats made more errors and used a non-spatial cognitive strategy Primiparous hAPOEε4 rats increased use of a non-spatial cognitive strategy Parity increased neurogenesis in wildtype rats, but decreased it in hAPOEε4 rats Primiparous hAPOEε4 rats had less active new neurons in response to memory retrieval Parity and hAPOEε4 affect the neuroimmune milieu in a region-specific manner
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".