MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2318525787 · doi:10.1242/jeb.068049

HOW LONELINESS AFFECTS SNAILS' MEMORIES

2011· article· en· W2318525787 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathryn Knight

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineNeuroscience
ThématiqueMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLonelinessLymnaea stagnalisIsolation (microbiology)Affect (linguistics)SnailBiologyPsychologyEcologyZoologySocial psychologyCommunication

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Loneliness isn't good for you. Sarah Dalesman from Hotchkiss Brain Institute, The University of Calgary, Canada, says, ‘Isolation has been shown in the past to act as a stress that often has negative effects on the ability of mammals to learn and form memories.’ But how does isolation affect the memory of an animal with a much simpler brain: the great pond snail, Lymnaea stagnalis? According to Dalesman, isolation does affect the mollusc's behaviour. She explains that the snails – which are hermaphrodites, having both male and female sexual organs – usually engage in reciprocal sex, taking it in turns to adopt the role of the male. However, after 8 days of isolation, the snails only take on the male role. Given the dramatic effect of isolation on the snail's simple behaviour, Dalesman and her principal investigator, Ken Lukowiak, wondered how loneliness might affect the mollusc's ability to from long-term memories (p. 4179).However, when Dalesman tested the snails' long-term memories after 8 days of isolation, they seemed unaffected. According to Dalesman, pond snails can be trained to keep their breathing tubes closed when they are in oxygen-starved water by giving them a gentle tap when ever they try to extend it to breathe. With the correct training regime, the snails can remember the lesson for over a day. Having expected that 8 days in solitary confinement would prevent the snails from laying down the long-term memory, the duo were surprised when the molluscs successfully remembered to keep their breathing tubes firmly shut 24 h after training. ‘We almost stopped there,’ admitted Dalesman, adding, ‘sbut we were fairly sure the snails were aware of lack of contact with other individuals, so we thought that changing the context in which they experience isolation might alter our results.’Knowing that low calcium water concentrations and predator odours are stressful for the snails – low calcium concentrations prevent the snails from forming long-term memories, a whiff of predator odour improves their memory, and a combination of the two leads to normal memory formation as if there was no stress – the duo decided to find out how combinations of the stresses in association with isolation affected the molluscs' memories.Amazingly, isolation improved the memories of the molluscs in stressful low calcium conditions. Meanwhile, 8 days of isolation did not affect the memories of snails experiencing the scent of a predator. However, when the duo combined all three stresses – solitary confinement, low calcium and the scent of a predator – the snails were unable to from the long-term memory after training. ‘This is the first time that we have found that kairomones [predator odour] don't enhance memory formation; instead their presence seems to result in memory being blocked’, says Dalesman.So isolation did affect the ability of the snails to form long-term memories, but it was entirely context dependent, with isolation improving memory in some situations while abolishing it in others.Dalesman and Lukowiak suspect that the snails' behavioural response to isolation – adopting the male role during mating – may make the low calcium situation less stressful because they require less calcium when reproducing as males than they do when producing eggs as females, freeing the isolated snails to form better memories. However, they suspect that a combination of all three stressors might push the snails over the edge. ‘Several different environmental stressors may just be too much to cope with and they are no longer able to pay enough attention to training to form long-term memory’, suggests Dalesman.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,005
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,015

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,146
Tête enseignante GPT0,340
Écart entre enseignants0,194 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Experimental Biology→Même sujetMemory and Neural Mechanisms→Travaux en français237 207→