Developmental Critical Windows and Sensitive Periods as Three-Dimensional Constructs in Time and Space
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A critical window (sensitive period) represents a period during development when an organism's phenotype is responsive to intrinsic or extrinsic (environmental) factors. Such windows represent a form of developmental phenotypic plasticity and result from the interaction between genotype and environment. Critical windows have typically been defined as comprising discrete periods in development with a distinct starting time and end time, as identified by experiments following an on and an off protocol. Yet in reality, periods of responsiveness during development are likely more ambiguous that depicted. Our goal is to extend the concept of the developmental critical window by introducing a three-dimensional construct in which time during development, dose of the stressor applied, and the resultant phenotypic modification can be utilized to more realistically define a critical window. Using the example of survival of the brine shrimp (Artemia franciscana) during exposure to different salinity levels during development, we illustrate that it is not just stressor dose or exposure time but the interaction of these two factors that results in the measured phenotypic change, which itself may vary within a critical window. We additionally discuss a systems approach to critical windows, in which the components of a developing system--whether they be molecular, physiological, or morphological--may show differing responses with respect to time and dose. Thus, the plasticity of each component may contribute to a broader overall system response.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".