Probiotic supplementation prevents stress-impaired spatial learning and enhances the effects of environmental enrichment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Probiotics are live microorganisms that offer health benefits, influencing the microbiota-gut-brain axis. Probiotics can improve cognitive functions, including learning and memory, by modulating the gut microbiota, reducing inflammation, and producing neuroactive substances. This study examined the effects of probiotic supplementation prior to chronic stress or enrichment (EE) treatment on cognitive function and brain physiology. Rats received probiotics or control diet starting at 6 months of age for 3 months. They were then randomly assigned to unpredictable stress, or EE for 6 weeks, with a home cage control group on a control diet included. Results showed that probiotic supplementation prevented spatial memory impairments induced by chronic stress and enhanced learning when combined with EE. These behavioral improvements were linked to increased gut microbiome diversity. Higher levels of the microglia marker Iba-1 were found in the stressed group compared to the EE group in the locus coeruleus, which probiotic reversed. Differences in blood-brain-barrier integrity were observed between the stress and EE groups, as indicated by albumin levels. Higher levels of tyrosine hydroxylase were observed in the hippocampus of the EE groups. The interaction of probiotic supplementation, chronic stress, and environmental EE offers a promising area for enhancing cognitive function and brain health.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".