MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412596760 · doi:10.1111/ejn.70184

Distinct Brain Electrical Activity Patterns in Dominant and Submissive Mice: Implications for Cognitive Impairments

2025· article· en· W4412596760 on OpenAlexaff
Maryia Bairachnaya, Alexey Shnyder, Albert Pinhasov, Izhak Michaelevski

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Neuroscience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersMinistry of Science and Technology, Israel
KeywordsNoveltyPsychologyPrefrontal cortexNeuroscienceCognitionRecallCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prefrontal, visual, and posterior parietal cortices are key to cognition, social interaction, and novelty recognition, but the impact of social hierarchy and inherent stress sensitivity on their interplay remains underexplored. Our findings reveal significant neural differences between stress-resilient dominant (Dom) and stress-sensitive submissive (Sub) mice, particularly in theta band power, inter-regional coherence, and phase-amplitude coupling. Dom mice exhibited reduced theta coherence and dynamic changes in theta-gamma phase amplitude coupling between the prefrontal and visual cortices, which were associated with better memory recall and cognitive flexibility. In addition, Dom mice showed increased left-to-right visual cortex connectivity during the recognition task, linked to successful novelty discrimination, while Sub mice lacked this theta-driven causality. These results suggest that stress sensitivity associated with social rank alters neural activity and connectivity, contributing to the differing performance of Dom and Sub mice in novelty recognition tasks, providing potential diagnostic and therapeutic implications for targeting theta-driven connectivity.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Neuroscience→Same topicNeural dynamics and brain function→French-language works237,207→