Cited by 104Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Abnormal vibrissa‐related behavior and loss of barrel field inhibitory neurons in 5xFAD transgenics

Open access
Flanigan, T. J., Xue, Y., Kishan Rao, S., Dhanushkodi, A., McDonald, M. P.·2014·Genes, Brain and Behavior

Abstract

A recent study reported lower anxiety in the 5xFAD transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer's disease, as measured by reduced time on the open arms of an elevated plus maze. This is important because all behaviors in experimental animals must be interpreted in light of basal anxiety and response to novel environments. We conducted a comprehensive anxiety battery in the 5xFAD transgenics and replicated the plus-maze phenotype. However, we found that it did not reflect reduced anxiety, but rather abnormal avoidance of the closed arms on the part of transgenics and within-session habituation to the closed arms on the part of wild-type controls. We noticed that the 5xFAD transgenics did not engage in the whisker-barbering behavior typical of mice of this background strain. This is suggestive of abnormal social behavior, and we suspected it might be related to their avoidance of the closed arms on the plus maze. Indeed, transgenic mice exhibited excessive home-cage social behavior and impaired social recognition, and did not permit barbering by wild-type mice when pair-housed. When their whiskers were snipped the 5xFAD transgenics no longer avoided the closed arms on the plus maze. Examination of parvalbumin (PV) staining showed a 28.9% reduction in PV+ inhibitory interneurons in the barrel fields of 5xFAD mice, and loss of PV+ fibers in layers IV and V. This loss of vibrissal inhibition suggests a putatively aversive overstimulation that may be responsible for the transgenics' avoidance of the closed arms in the plus maze.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/gbb.12133

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • 5xFAD mice (6 months or older) prefer open arms due to anxiety or disrupted vibrissa inhibition.

    “5xFAD mice (6-m or older) prefer open arms 134 due to anxiety or disrupted vibrissa inhibition 135 .”

    From NAD+ hydrolase Sarm1 is a key driver of synapse degeneration and memory loss in Alzheimer’s disease (2025) · cites this paper as [135]

    The Discussion supports disrupted vibrissal inhibition as a possible explanation for closed-arm avoidance, but explicitly says the open-arm behavior cannot be attributed to decreased anxiety. The Methods > Behavior section reports testing mice at 9–11 months, so this paper does not establish the claim for all mice aged 6 months or older. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In 5xFAD mice, significantly reduced PV-positive neuron numbers were shown in cingulate and motor cortices, cortical layer IV, and hippocampal CA1-3 and dentate gyrus subfields.

    “In 5xFAD mice, significantly reduced PV-positive neuron numbers were shown in cingulate and motor cortices [127], as well as cells in the cortical layer IV [128] or the hippocampal CA1–3 and dentate gyrus subfields [126].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Flanigan, T. J., Xue, Y., Kishan Rao, S., Dhanushkodi, A., & McDonald, M. P.
Affiliations
  • Department of Neurology
  • University of Tennessee Health Science Center (US)
Corresponding author
McDonald, M. P.
Venue
Genes, Brain and Behavior
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-04-22
Volume
13
Issue
5
Pages
488-500
ISSN
  • 1601-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1601-1848
OpenAlex
W1962780572
Cited by
104
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2015: 3
FWCI
1.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genes Brain & Behavior (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Aging (R01AG031253, R01AG040230, R21AG041935)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
5xFAD mice, Alzheimer's disease model, anxiety, elevated plus maze, habituation, barrel cortex, parvalbumin interneurons, social recognition, social behavior
MeSH terms
Alzheimer Disease, Animals, Brain, Interneurons, Phenotype, Social Behavior, Vibrissae, Amyloid beta-Protein Precursor, Maze Learning, Mice, Presenilin-1

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review