Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36160917›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in synaptic neuroscience2022

Killer or helper? The mechanism underlying the role of adenylate activated kinase in sound conditioning.

Rui Zhao, Changhong Ma, Minjun Wang, Xinxin Li, Wei Liu, Lin Shi, Ning Yu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in synaptic neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Rui ZhaoDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China.
Changhong MaDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China.
Minjun WangDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China.
Xinxin LiDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China.
Wei LiuDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China.
Lin ShiDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China.
Ning YuDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Ministry of Education, National Clinical Research Center for Otolaryngologic Diseases, The Sixth Medical Center of People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, State Key Lab of Hearing Science, Beijing Key Lab of Hearing Impairment Prevention and Treatment, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To investigate whether sound conditioning influences auditory system protection by activating adenylate activated kinase (AMPK), and if such adaption protects ribbon synapses from high-intensity noise exposure. Materials and methods: CBA mice (12 weeks old) were randomly divided into four groups ( Results: There was no significant difference in auditory brainstem response (ABR) threshold between SC and control mice. The degree of hearing loss of animals in the two SC groups was significantly reduced compared to the NE group after 110 dB noise exposure. Animals in the SC group showed faster recovery to normal thresholds, and 65 dB SPL sound conditioning had a stronger auditory protection effect. After sound conditioning, the amplitude of ABR I wave in the SC group was higher than that in the control group. Immediately after noise exposure (D0), the amplitudes of ABR I wave decreased significantly in all groups; the most significant decrease was in the NE group, with amplitude in 65SC+NE group significantly higher than that in the 85SC+NE group. Wave I latency in the SC group was significantly shorter than that in the control group. At D0, latency was prolonged in the NE group compared with the control group. In contrast, there was no significant difference in latency between the 65SC+NE and 85SC+NE groups. Further, at D14, there was no significant difference between the NE and control groups, while latency remained significantly shorter in the 65SC+NE and 85SC+NE groups compared with controls. Number of ribbon synapses in SC mice did not differ significantly from that in controls. After 110 dB noise exposure, there were significantly more ribbon synapses in the SC+NE group than the NE group. Ribbon synapses of all groups were recovered 14 days after the noise exposure, while the SC group had a shorter recovery time than the non-SC groups ( Conclusion: Sound conditioning animals were more noise resistant and recovered hearing faster than non-SC animals. Further, 65 dB SPL SC offered better hearing protection than 85 dB SPL SC. Early AMPK activation may protect hearing by increasing ATP storage and reducing the release of large quantities of p-AMPK, which could help to inhibit synapse damage.

Indexed as

ATP-consumptionhair cellnoise-induced hearing losssound conditioningsynapses

Identifiers

PMID36160917
PMCPMC9490174

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.