Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37205472›Full record

ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2023

Sex similarities and dopaminergic differences in interval timing.

Hannah R Stutt, Matthew A Weber, Rachael C Cole, Alexandra S Bova, Xin Ding, Madison S McMurrin, Nandakumar S Narayanan

Open access · greenAbstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hannah R Stutt
Rachael C Cole
Xin Ding
Madison S McMurrin
Nandakumar S NarayananORCID 0000-0002-0427-0003
University of Iowa · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rodent behavioral studies have largely focused on male animals, which has limited the generalizability and conclusions of neuroscience research. Working with humans and rodents, we studied sex effects during interval timing that requires participants to estimate an interval of several seconds by making motor responses. Interval timing requires attention to the passage of time and working memory for temporal rules. We found no differences between human females and males in interval timing response times (timing accuracy) or the coefficient of variance of response times (timing precision). Consistent with prior work, we also found no differences between female and male rodents in timing accuracy or precision. In female rodents, there was no difference in interval timing between estrus and diestrus cycle stages. Because dopamine powerfully affects interval timing, we also examined sex differences with drugs targeting dopaminergic receptors. In both female and male rodents, interval timing was delayed after administration of sulpiride (D2-receptor antagonist), quinpirole (D2-receptor agonist), and SCH-23390 (D1-receptor antagonist). By contrast, after administration of SKF-81297 (D1-receptor agonist), interval timing shifted earlier only in male rodents. These data illuminate sex similarities and differences in interval timing. Our results have relevance for rodent models of both cognitive function and brain disease by increasing represenation in behavioral neuroscience.

Identifiers

PMID37205472
PMCPMC10187305
OpenAlexW4372404250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.