Anxiety- and nociception-like behaviours in mature adult mice induced by audiovisual overstimulation during infancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate the behavioural effects in adult mice previously subjected to audiovisual overstimulation during infancy and adolescence. Mice aged 21, 26 and 36 days (p21, p26 and p36) underwent auditory (70 db) and visual (flashing lights) stimulation for 2 or 6 h per day until p64; naive animals were used as controls. At p200, tests assessed respectively motor activity (open field test), depression (forced swimming and splash tests), anxiety (hole board, plus maze and marble burying tests, aggression (resident-intruder test), and nociception (von Frey and hot plate tests). There were no significant (ANOVA, p > 0.05) behavioural changes in forced swimming, splash, hole board, or marble burying tests between overstimulated and naive groups. However, the p21 group showed significantly (ANOVA, p < 0.05) increased anxiety-like behaviour (2 h) in the elevated plus maze test and altered nociceptive behaviour in the von Frey test (2 and 6 h). The p26 group (2 h) displayed significantly reduced rearing behaviours, fewer entries in the plus maze test, and faster reaction times to noxious thermal stimulation (2 h). Audiovisual overstimulation during early development can promote anxiety-like behaviour and affect nociceptive behaviour in adult mice. • Audiovisual overstimulation promotes changes in anxious behaviour and nociceptive sensitivity in adult mature mice. • Animals subjected to a shorter daily time (2 h) of audiovisual overstimulation were more susceptible than the other groups. • The late onset (postnatal day 36) of overstimulation did not lead to behavioral changes in mature adult mice.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".