INTERPLAY BETWEEN EARLY-LIFE STRESS AND DIET IN A RODENT MODEL: EFFECTS ON EMOTIONAL MEMORY AND ON MITOCHONDRIAL FUNCTION AND NEUROINFLAMMATION IN THE AMYGDALA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stress exposure can promote neuroinflammation and impair neural plasticity, especially in limbic areas, by affecting the release of neurotransmitters and immune mediators1.In rodents, repeated homotypical stress (RHS) increases the expression of toll-like receptor type 4 (TLR4) in the brain1.TLR4 induces translocation of NF-kB to the nucleus and expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines and enzymes2.Moreover, RHS causes depressive-and anxiety-like beha-vior3.In this study, we aimed to investigate if the TLR4 pathway modulates the behavioral response to RHS.The local ethical committee (School of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Ribeiro Preto-FCFRP/ USP; CEUA number 19.1.731.60.9)approved the procedures.8 weeks-old male C57Bl/6 (WT) mice were submitted to an RHS, the restraint stress, for 10 days, 2 hours per day.Mice received vehicle or TAK242 (10mg/kg) one hour before stress (Experiment 1).After the last stress session, mice were food-deprived for 24h and then evaluated in the Novelty Suppressed Feeding test (NSFT).24h later, Open Field Test (OFT) followed by the Forced Swim Test (FST) were performed.A similar protocol was used to evaluate behavior in TLR4KO mice (Experiment 2).All mice were euthanized, and brain tissues were collected for later analysis.In Experiment 1, RHS induced anxiety-like behavior in NSFT only in vehicle-treated mice but not in TAK242-treated mice (p<0,01, Sidak).In Experiment 2, TLR4KO mice had hypolocomotion in OFT (p<0,05, Sidak).RHS induced depressive-like behavior in the FST only in WT, but not in TLR4 KO mice (p<0,05, Sidak), moreover gene expression of pro-IL1 were increased by stress.No changes were observed in the other behaviors in both experiments.Therefore, rRHS-induced behavioral alterations are, in part, mediated by the TLR4 pathway.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".