MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406024145 · doi:10.1002/alz.088106

Theta band optogenetic stimulation of the septo‐hippocampal fibres in the fornix reduces interictal spikes and rescues memory performance in hAPP‐j20 mice

2024· article· en· W4406024145 on OpenAlexaff
Eva Vico Varela, James E. Carmichael, Frédéric Manseau, Jisoo Choi, Guillaume Etter, Sylvain Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptogeneticsFornixNeuroscienceHippocampal formationStimulationHippocampusBurstingIctalInterneuronBiologyElectroencephalographyInhibitory postsynaptic potential

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Altered neuronal timing and synchrony are biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and correlate with memory impairments. Electrical stimulation of the fornix, the main fibre bundle connecting the hippocampus to the septum, has emerged as a potential intervention to restore network synchrony and memory performance in human AD and mouse models. However, electrical stimulation is non-specific and may partially explain why fornix stimulation in AD patients has yielded mixed results. We hypothesize that driving the specific circuits underlying rhythmicity within the fornix via optogenetics at the biologically relevant theta rhythm (5Hz) will stabilize septo-hippocampal network timing in an AD mouse model (hAPP-j20) to alleviate hypersynchronous interictal spikes (IS) and restore memory performance. METHODS: GABAergic neurons in the septum were transfected with the excitatory opsin ChETA (or eYFP controls) in J20+/+ or J20± littermate controls. An optical fibre was placed above the fornix to limit excitation to the projection fibres and recording electrodes were placed in CA1 to measure network oscillations. 5Hz stimulation was applied continuously for 4 hours following the encoding phase of either novel-object-location or passive contextual avoidance memory tasks. We also combined in vivo calcium imaging with electrical recordings in CA1 to monitor network activity to determine how IS shape hippocampal cell assemblies in J20+/+ mice without fornix stimulation. RESULTS: Interictal spikes were present in sleep in J20+/+ mice, and at a higher rate during REM (4.78/min) compared to slow-wave (1.76/min; n = 11, p<0.001, one-way ANOVA). J20+eYFP controls displayed a strong negative correlation between the rate of IS and memory recall score (n = 9, r = -0.62, p = 0.015). 5Hz optical fornix stimulation reduced the occurrence of IS in REM both during stimulation and 4hrs post-stimulation (n = 11, p = 0.024, repeated measures ANOVA). Continuous 4-hour theta stimulation between the encoding and recall phases of both memory tasks rescued J20+ChETA performance to levels comparable with healthy controls while J20+eYFP mice performed at the chance level (n = 9-10 per group, p = 0.017, two-way mixed ANOVA). CONCLUSION: These data validate theta band optical stimulation as a viable method to pace the septo-hippocampal network effectively reducing IS events and recovering memory performance in an APP mouse model.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicMemory and Neural Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→