Cells and Molecules Underpinning Cannabis-Related Variations in Cortical Thickness during Adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During adolescence, cannabis experimentation is common, and its association with interindividual variations in brain maturation well studied. Cellular and molecular underpinnings of these system-level relationships are, however, unclear. We thus conducted a three-step study. First, we exposed adolescent male mice to Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) or a synthetic cannabinoid WIN 55,212-2 (WIN) and assessed differentially expressed genes (DEGs), spine numbers, and dendritic complexity in their frontal cortex. Second, in human (male) adolescents, we examined group differences in cortical thickness in 34 brain regions, using magnetic resonance imaging, between those who experimented with cannabis before age 16 (n = 140) and those who did not (n = 327). Finally, we correlated spatially these group differences with gene expression of human homologs of mouse-identified DEGs. The spatial expression of 13 THC-related human homologs of DEGs correlated with cannabis-related variations in cortical thickness, and virtual histology revealed coexpression patterns of these 13 genes with cell-specific markers of astrocytes, microglia, and a type of pyramidal cells enriched in dendrite-regulating genes. Similarly, the spatial expression of 18 WIN-related human homologs of DEGs correlated with group differences in cortical thickness and showed coexpression patterns with the same three cell types. Gene ontology analysis indicated that 37 THC-related human homologs are enriched in neuron projection development, while 33 WIN-related homologs are enriched in processes associated with learning and memory. In mice, we observed spine loss and lower dendritic complexity in pyramidal cells of THC-exposed animals (vs controls). Experimentation with cannabis during adolescence may influence cortical thickness by impacting glutamatergic synapses and dendritic arborization.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".