MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4415908358 · doi:10.1242/jeb.251539

Stress tested, but sparrows stay tough

2025· article· en· W4415908358 sur OpenAlexaff
Alexandra N. Schoen

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineImmunology and Microbiology
ThématiqueBird parasitology and diseases
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Winnipeg
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDamagesStress (linguistics)Fight-or-flight responseHormoneJuvenileStressor

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

You might think of stress as a bad thing, but it is extremely important to survival. Without stress, the body doesn't know if it's in danger. When you are in danger, your body responds by sending more energy molecules and oxygen to your muscles that help you fight or get away. All animals respond to stress, which is in part controlled by molecules called hormones that tell the body what to do. However, when danger is always present or the stress is intense, this may have negative consequences, such as making an animal sick or even damaging their DNA. To investigate this, Ursula Beattie of Tufts University, USA, and her colleagues from across the USA decided to look at how house sparrows (Passer domesticus) respond to stress, and whether being more stressed causes changes in the levels of stress hormones and damages DNA.The scientists collected 40 adult and 17 juvenile sparrows in eastern Massachusetts before letting the adult sparrows relax for 3 weeks. The researchers then stressed some of the adult sparrows for 2 weeks by exposing them to new ‘stressful’ experiences, such as playing a radio or flashing disco lights. Afterwards, the team let the birds relax for 2 weeks, then repeated the stressful process five more times over 6 months. The scientists also decreased the amount of stress for one group of sparrows with each round of stressful activities while increasing the amount of stressful time for another group. This way, some birds experienced more stress than others. After each round of stressful experiences, and again after six stress-free weeks, the researchers collected blood from the sparrows to look for the changes in the birds’ stress hormone – corticosterone – and to look for damage to their DNA. The team was surprised to find that the sparrows showed no differences in blood corticosterone or DNA damage regardless of how much stress they experienced. However, 6 weeks after the last round of new experiences, adult sparrows that experienced the most stress activities had higher corticosterone levels. Beattie suggests that this might be a way for the adults to prepare themselves for another round of stressful experiences by already having more stress hormone, but without causing any DNA damage.The scientists then wanted to investigate whether juvenile sparrows responded to stress in a similar way as adults. The team stressed half of the juveniles similar to the way they had stressed the adults with two main differences. First, the team only gave the juveniles 2 days to relax, so the stress of being caught was used as the first stress the sparrows experienced. Second, the juveniles only experienced the stressful lights and sounds four times over 18 days. Similar to the adults, the stressed juvenile sparrows had no changes in corticosterone levels or DNA damage compared with their relaxed counterparts. Also, both the adults and juveniles always had higher corticosterone levels after the stressful experiences, no matter how many previous rounds of stressful experiences they had. The researchers believe this shows the sparrows never got used to the new lights and sounds, and that stressing the sparrows for longer than 6 months, so they have more time to get used to the stress, might be useful in future experiments.Beattie comments that the results from these experiments show that different facets of the sparrows’ biology react in different ways to long-term stress. Therefore, Beattie suggests that looking at just one piece of the birds’ biology, such as corticosterone levels, is not enough to figure out whether a sparrow is stressed over a long period of time. This may be the same for other animals too, which might experience long-term stress without associated negative impacts such as DNA damage.

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: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,013
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,043

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
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 recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0130,003

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 Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,312
Écart entre enseignants0,299 · 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'étudeObservationnel
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
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Experimental BiologyMême sujetBird parasitology and diseasesTravaux en français237 207