New neurons in old brains: implications of age in the analysis of neurogenesis in post-mortem tissue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Adult neurogenesis, the proliferation and integration of newly generated neurons, has been observed in the adult mammalian hippocampus of many species. Numerous studies have also found adult neurogenesis in the human hippocampus, but several recent high-profile studies have suggested that this process is considerably reduced in humans, occurring in children but not in adults. In comparison, rodent studies also show age-related decline but a greater degree of proliferation of new neurons in adult animals. These differences may represent biological species differences or could alternatively be explained by methodological differences in tissue handling and fixation. Here, we examine whether differences in the post-mortem interval between death and tissue fixation might impact subsequent detection of adult neurogenesis due to increased tissue degradation. Because there are fewer new neurons present in older subjects to begin with we hypothesized that, subject age might interact significantly with post-mortem interval in the detection of adult neurogenesis. We analyzed neurogenesis in the hippocampus of rats that were either perfusion-fixed or the brains extracted and immersion-fixed at various post-mortem intervals. We observed an interaction between animal age and the time delay between death and tissue fixation. While similar levels of neurogenesis were observed in young rats regardless of fixation, older rats had significantly fewer labeled neurons when fixation was not immediate. Furthermore, the morphological detail of the labeled neurons was significantly reduced in the delayed fixation conditions at all ages. This study highlights critical concerns that must be considered when using post-mortem tissue to quantify adult neurogenesis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.231 | 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 teacher head, 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".