Presence of a home cage running wheel, but not wheel running per se, decreases social motivation in adult C57BL/6J female mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Physical activity offers myriad benefits to health and well-being, in humans and other animals as well. In rodents, voluntary wheel running can attenuate the effects of both physical and social stressors on rodent social behavior. Whether wheel running affects rodent social behaviors per se remains less well understood. We conducted the current study to test whether home cage access to running wheels impacts the social behaviors of adult, group-housed C57BL/6J female mice during same-sex interactions with novel females. Group-housed females were either given continuous home cage running wheel access or a standard paper hut starting at weaning, and as adults, social behaviors were measured during interactions with novel females. In two cohorts, we found that 5 weeks of running wheel access during adolescence reduced the time that subject females spent investigating a novel female and also tended to reduce total ultrasonic vocalizations produced during interactions. These effects were not reversed by a 2-week period of running wheel removal but were recapitulated in a different cohort by 2 weeks of running wheel access in adulthood. Unexpectedly, we found that these effects on female social behavior were not due to wheel running per se, because females raised from weaning with ‘immobile’ running wheels also showed low rates of social behaviors during same-sex interactions in adulthood. Overall, we find that the presence of a running wheel in the home cage has an enduring inhibitory influence on female social behavior during same-sex interactions, a finding that has implications for the design of studies that include same-sex interactions between female 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".