Comparison of social interaction and neural activation in the main olfactory bulb and the accessory olfactory bulb between Microtus mandarinus and Microtus fortis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To gain insight into the function of AOB and MOB during different social interaction and in different vole species, the behaviors and neural activation of the olfactory bulbs in social interactions of mandarin voles Microtus mandarinus and reed voles Microtus fortis were compared in the present research. Mandarin voles spent significantly more time attacking and sniffing their opponents and sniffing sawdust than reed voles. During same sex encounters, mandarin voles attacked their opponents for a significantly longer time and sniffed its opponent for shorter time compared with male-female interactions. However, no significant behavioral differences were found during encounters of two individual reed voles, regardless of gender composition of the pair. Using c-Fos as an indicator of neural activation, we observed that neural activation was significantly higher in almost all sub-regions of the main olfactory bulb (MOB) and the accessory olfactory bulb (AOB) of mandarin voles compared with reed voles. Numbers of c-Fos-ir neurons in almost all sub-regions of the AOB and the MOB during male-female interactions were also higher than those in interactions of the same sex. Anterior-posterior ratios of Fos-ir neurons in the AOBM (AOBMR) and the AOBG (AOBGR) in male-female interaction were significantly higher than those in interaction of the same sex. The AOBMR of male mandarin voles and reed voles were larger than those of females in male-female interactions. Behavioral patterns are consistent with cellular activity patterns. Consistent level of neural activation in MOB and AOB suggests important roles of both the main olfactory bulb and the accessory olfactory bulb in social interaction in two species.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".