Systematic Review and Transcriptomic Meta-analysis of Environmental Enrichment Reveal Core Molecular Programs of Brain Plasticity.

Environmental enrichment (EE) paradigms in rodents have long demonstrated that enhanced sensory, cognitive, social, and motor stimulation positively impacts brain function, improving learning, memory, and neuroplasticity. These effects have significant implications for understanding cognitive development and mitigating cognitive decline and brain aging. While numerous transcriptomic studies have explored EE-induced molecular changes, a unified view of the genes and pathways consistently modulated remains lacking. To address this gap, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We conducted a comprehensive PubMed search for all studies published up to February 2025 that matched all the following inclusion criteria: (1) employed EE paradigms; (2) were conducted on rodents; (3) utilized genome-wide transcriptomic methods; (4) examined brain regions or neuronal populations. The 323 retrieved articles were manually screened for relevance to the study aims and data availability. Datasets from 20 eligible RNA-seq reports were reprocessed using a unified analysis pipeline and subjected to a meta-analysis with three complementary statistical methods. Despite considerable heterogeneity across studies, our integrative analysis identified consistent gene expression signatures linked to synaptic function, plasticity and their transcriptional regulation. In particular, our findings highlight the upregulation of the activity-dependent transcriptional program, including Fos and Jun family members. These molecular insights advance our understanding of how EE impacts on neuronal and behavioral outcomes, and may inform therapeutic strategies aimed at replicating or enhancing EE benefits. To promote open science and foster further research, we developed an accessible web application, mEEtaBrain, that enables the neuroscience community to navigate and interrogate our meta-analysis results. Substantial methodological heterogeneity across source studies increased variability in the meta-analysis outcomes. The use of stressors or disease models, particularly in rat studies, introduced a major confounding factor and limited reliable interspecies comparison. Overall, the studies exhibited a low to moderate risk of bias.