MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392368375 · doi:10.1101/2024.03.03.583140

Exploring Behavioral and Neural Dynamics of Social Interactions during the Juvenile Stage in a Mouse Model of Fragile X Syndrome

2024· preprint· en· W4392368375 on OpenAlexaff
Moon Young Bae, Bosong Wang, Abdullah Abdullah, R.A. Ilyas, Veronica Rasheva, Kartikeya Murari, Ning Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFMR1JuvenileFragile X syndromeSocial behaviorSniffingKnockout mouseDevelopmental psychologyPsychologySocial anxietyGenotypeAnxietyPhysiologyClinical psychologyBiologyNeuroscienceGeneticsFragile xPsychiatryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Fragile X Syndrome (FXS), caused by Fmr1 mutations, is linked to cognitive and behavioral differences, including altered social interactions. Most mouse studies focus on adults, despite human research showing critical developmental changes in childhood and adolescence. We examined social behavior in juvenile male and female Fmr1 knockout (KO) mice as well as heterozygous (HET) females. We further assessed cortical activity in KO females to better understand early phenotypes. Methods Juvenile mice of both sexes and genotypes were paired in same-sex, novel dyads for 10-minute interactions. Key social behaviors such as head, anogenital, and body sniffing, and physical touch, as well as distance travelled, were analyzed with a marker-less tracking software. Frontal-parietal EEG recordings were collected from wild-type (WT) and KO females in home cage and social contexts to analyze power spectra across frequency bands. Results HET and KO females engaged in more frequent but shorter interaction events compared to WT females, with HET females showing the highest counts. Males displayed similar trends when comparing KO and WT. Males engaged in overall higher interaction events than females. EEG analyses revealed altered oscillatory activity in KO females compared to WT females, especially within theta, alpha, and beta bands, most prominently during the early interaction phase. Locomotor activity correlated weakly with head/anogenital sniffing but more strongly with body sniffing and touch. Discussion These findings suggest that Fmr1 -related differences in juvenile social behavior are sex-dependent and associated with cortical oscillatory changes. Characterizing these early phenotypes in both sexes allows us to further understand FXS development and informs potential routes for early intervention. Key Points Fragile X Syndrome (FXS), the leading inherited cause of autism, is associated with disruptions in social behavior. While social phenotypes are relatively well described in adult mouse models of FXS, juvenile manifestations remain poorly understood. Social behavior was assessed in juvenile male and female Fmr1 knockout (KO), heterozygous (HET, female only), and wildtype (WT) mice, and frontal-parietal EEG recordings were collected from WT and KO females. HET and KO females exhibited more frequent but shorter social interactions than WT females, with HET showing the greatest number of events. Males showed similar patterns when comparing KO and WT. Males engaged in higher overall interaction events than females. EEG recordings revealed altered oscillatory activity in KO compared to WT females, most pronounced during the early phase of social encounter. These findings reveal sex- and genotype-dependent differences in juvenile social behavior and cortical activity, highlighting the importance of studying juvenile development in FXS.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders→French-language works237,207→