Electroconvulsive shock and transcranial magnetic stimulation do not alter the survival or spine density of adult-born striatal neurons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adult neurogenesis has most often been studied in the hippocampus and subventricular zone-olfactory bulb, where newborn neurons contribute to a variety of behaviors. A handful of studies have also investigated adult neurogenesis in other brain regions, but relatively little is known about the properties of neurons added to non-canonical areas. One such region is the striatum. Adult-born striatal neurons have been described in both rodents and humans, but the regulation of these neurons is poorly understood. Since striatal dysfunction occurs in Parkinson's disease, which is amenable to neurostimulation therapies, we investigated whether electroconvulsive shock (ECS) or transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) modulate neuroplasticity of adult-born striatal neurons. Adult-born cells were labelled in transgenic mice and 8 days later mice were given 10 stimulations over the course of 3 weeks. Adult-born striatal neurons were consistently observed in all groups. Their dendritic morphology and expression of DARPP32 and NeuN indicated a medium spiny neuron phenotype. However, neither ECS nor rTMS altered the number of new neurons, and both treatments also had no effect on the density of dendritic spines compared to unstimulated controls. These results suggest that neither ECS nor rTMS alter early neuronal survival or morphological plasticity at postsynaptic sites in the striatum.
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".