MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417519815 · doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2026.108165

C57BL/6 Mouse Substrain Differences in the Ontogeny of Auditory Fear

2025· article· en· W4417519815 on OpenAlexafffund
Hanista Premachandran, Kanza Naveed, Maithé Arruda-Carvalho

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurobiology of Learning and Memory · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicStress Responses and Cortisol
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOntogenyInbred strainPhenotypeRodentHouse mice

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early life adversity is a major risk factor for mental disorders later in life. Genetic and individual differences modulate the impact of early life trauma and stress on adult mental health, emphasizing the importance of understanding how the early onset of individual differences may shape behavioral outcomes across life. In rodents, genetic differences can be studied using inbred rodent strains or substrains. While C57BL/6 mouse substrains differ in their adult fear behavior, it is unclear when in development these differences emerge. Here we compared the ontogenesis of remote auditory fear retrieval, spontaneous recovery and renewal in the mouse C57BL/6J (Jax, from Jackson Laboratories) and C57BL/6NTac (Taconic Biosciences) substrains spanning postnatal days (P)16, P18, P21, P25 and P30. Taconic male and female mice show an earlier onset of persistent auditory fear memory and spontaneous recovery (females only) compared to Jax mice. Male Taconic mice also display earlier onset of renewal compared to Jax males. These data identify ontogenetic differences in fear processing among C57BL/6 mouse substrains, highlighting how individual differences can contribute to altered behavioral phenotypes in early development.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueNeurobiology of Learning and MemorySame topicStress Responses and CortisolFrench-language works237,207