Increased behavioural and histological variability arising from changes in cerebrovascular anatomy of the Mongolian gerbil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The bilateral common carotid artery occlusion (BCCAO) in the Mongolian gerbil has been used as a simple and highly reproducible model of forebrain ischemia due to an incomplete circle of Willis. However, increased behavioral and histological variability to a typical 5 min period of ischemia in this modelled us to conclude that the vasculature was changing. To test this hypothesis I compared gerbils from two Canadian suppliers. Gerbils from Charles River (CR) exhibited a greater incidence of complete or partial circle of Willis compared to their High Oak (HO) counterparts. This altered vasculature pattern in the CR versus HO gerbils was associated with reductions in behavioral activation that characteristically accompany conditions of milder ischemia resulting in less severe hippocampal CA1 cell loss (e.g. ~70% CA1 cell loss vs. 95% CA1 loss). -- Gerbils from CR, the main supplier in North America, no longer represent a reliable model for use in forebrain ischemia studies. Gerbils from HO while superior to those from HO are also more variable in their response to BCCAO than those used as recently as 5 years ago. Thus the gerbil model of forebrain ischemia, at least using CR animals, no longer produces consistent injury and behavioral alterations. Investigators are urged to consider adopting other models in future neuroprotection studies or ensure that their gerbil population lacks communicating arteries.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".