MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7010306126

Impaired fear memory, altered object memory and modified hippocampal synaptic plasticity in split-brain mice

2008· other· en· W7010306126 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro) · 2008
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial biofilms and quorum sensing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Heritage Foundation for Medical ResearchUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsHippocampal formationLong-term potentiationHippocampusSynaptic plasticityRecognition memoryForebrainElectrophysiologyCorpus callosumCognitive neuroscience of visual object recognitionBasal forebrain
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hippocampus is critical for memory formation. However, the contributions of the hippocampal commissure (HC) and the corpus callosum (CC) are less clear. To elucidate the role of the forebrain commissures in learning and memory, we performed a behavioural and electrophysiological characterization of an inbred mouse strain that displays agenesis of the CC and congenitally reduced HC (BTBR T+ tf/J; 'BTBR'). Compared to a control strain, BTBR mice have severely impaired contextual fear memory, with normal object recognition memory. Interestingly, continuous environmental “enrichment” significantly increased object recognition in BTBR, but not in control C57BL/6 („BL/6?) mice. In area CA1 of hippocampal slices, BTBR displayed intact expression of long-term potentiation (LTP), paired-pulse facilitation (PPF) and basal synaptic transmission, compared to BL/6 mice. However, BTBR hippocampal slices show an increased susceptibility to depotentiation (DPT), an activity-induced reversal of LTP. We conclude that the HC and CC are critical for some forms of hippocampal memory and for synaptic resistance to DPT. Agenesis of the CC and HC may unmask some latent ability to encode, store or retrieve certain forms of recognition memory. We suggest that the increased susceptibility to DPT in BTBR may underlie the memory phenotype reported here.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.199 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro)→Same topicBacterial biofilms and quorum sensing→French-language works237,207→