MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967714812 · doi:10.1002/cne.23109

Organization of the gymnotiform fish pallium in relation to learning and memory: II. Extrinsic connections

2012· article· en· W1967714812 on OpenAlexafffund
Ana C.C. Giassi, Terence Duarte, William G. Ellis, Leonard Maler

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Comparative Neurology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish biology, ecology, and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologyElectroreceptionNeuroscienceCerebrumElectric fishTectumNucleusAnatomyForebrainSensory systemDiencephalonMidbrainCentral nervous systemFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present article reports on the telencephalic connections of regions of the dorsal telencephalon of the weakly electric fish Apteronotus leptorhynchus and Gymnotus sp. that are involved in learning and memory: the lateral (DL), central (DC), and dorsal (DD) regions of the pallium and the intermediate region between DL and DC (Dx). We find that the main route of transmission consists of diencephalic (preglomerular complex; PG) glutamatergic input to DL; glutamatergic projections from DL to DC and Dx; and glutamatergic output from DC/Dx to di-, mes-, and rhombencephalic nuclei. Although PG efferents to DL are spatially organized, the projection from DL to DC appears to be diffuse. The connections of DD are entirely intrinsic to the pallium: DL projects to DD (glutamatergic) and DD feeds back to DL (glutamatergic); DD also projects to DC and has strong contralateral connections. In addition, DL and DD receive input from subpallial regions; we suggest that these are associated with the previously identified γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA)-ergic, dopaminergic, and somatostatin-positive input to these regions. The DL/DD connections are very complex, because DL projects to and receives input from different subdivisions of DD. These subdivisions are linked by circuitry intrinsic to DD itself. DL and DD both contain recurrent putatively excitatory (glutamatergic) connections as well as local putatively inhibitory (GABAergic) interneurons. In contrast, recurrent excitatory connections appears to be absent in DC, and local inhibition is also barely present. Finally, we speculate on the implications of this pattern of connectivity for theories of short-term memory and long-term associative memory.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations66
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Comparative NeurologySame topicFish biology, ecology, and behaviorFrench-language works237,207