Recovery from social isolation requires dopamine in males, but not the autism-related gene <i>nlg3</i> in either sex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social isolation causes profound changes in social behaviour in a variety of species. However, the genetic and molecular mechanisms modulating behavioural responses to social isolation and social recovery remain to be elucidated. Here, we quantified the behavioural response of vinegar flies to social isolation using two distinct protocols (social space preference and sociability, the spontaneous tendencies to form groups). We found that social isolation increased social space and reduced sociability. These effects of social isolation were reversible and could be reduced after 3 days of group housing. Flies with a loss of function of neuroligin3 (orthologue of autism-related neuroligin genes) with known increased social space in a socially enriched environment were still able to recover from social isolation. We also show that dopamine (DA) is needed for a response to social isolation and recovery in males but not in females. Furthermore, only in males, DA levels are reduced after isolation and are not recovered after group housing. Finally, in socially enriched flies mutant for neuroligin3 , DA levels are reduced in males, but not in females. We propose a model to explain how DA and neuroligin3 are involved in the behavioural response to social isolation and its recovery in a dynamic and sex-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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".