Cognitive enrichment improves spatial memory and alters hippocampal synaptic connectivity in a mouse model for early-life stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Early-life stress (ELS) and enrichment often have opposing effects on long-term cognitive abilities. Deprivation, such as institutionalized care during early childhood neurodevelopmental periods, results in lifelong working memory and recall deficits. In contrast, enrichment facilitates new learning and slows cognitive decline due to aging and neurodegenerative diseases. Similarly, in rodent models, enrichment facilitates learning whereas ELS induces prominent spatial memory deficits. Environmental enrichment (EE) and ELS can cause opposing changes in hippocampal structure (e.g., shifts in synaptic density) that largely depend on experimental conditions. However, it remains untested whether EE can rescue the behavioral disruptions caused by ELS and how this would impact the hippocampus at advanced ages. To address this, we conducted a longitudinal study on ELS mice, extensively training them on a cognitive enrichment track (ET) or an exercise alone control track (CT). After this, the mice underwent repeated memory testing followed by brain extraction for anatomical analysis of their hippocampus. We found that ET reversed spatial memory deficits at 6, 13, and 20 months and reduced the number of dentate gyrus (DG) to CA3 synapses. Surprisingly, this reduction occurred at excitatory MF synapses surrounding CA3 somas in the stratum pyramidale-a layer not typically associated with MF terminals. Collectively, these findings suggest that cognitive enrichment during early adulthood may reverse ELS-induced spatial memory deficits by adjusting synaptic connectivity between the DG and CA3.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".