Organization of the gymnotiform fish pallium in relation to learning and memory: IV. Expression of conserved transcription factors and implications for the evolution of dorsal telencephalon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have cloned the apteronotid homologs of FoxP2, Otx1, and FoxO3. There was, in the case of all three genes, good similarity between the apteronotid and human amino acid sequences: FoxP2, 78%; Otx1, 54%; FoxO3, 71%. The functional domains of these genes were conserved to a far greater extent, on average: FoxP2, 89%; Otx1, 76%; FoxO3, 82%. This led us to hypothesize that the cellular functions of these genes might also be conserved. We used in situ hybridization to examine the distribution of the mRNA transcripts of these genes in the apteronotid telencephalon. We confined our analysis to the pallial regions previously associated with learning about social signals, whose circuitry has been closely examined in the other articles of this series. We found that AptFoxP2 and AptOtx1 transcripts were expressed predominantly in the dorsocentral division of the pallium (DC); the dorsolateral division of the pallium (DL) contained only weakly labeled neurons. In both cases, the distribution of labeled neurons was very heterogeneous, and unlabeled neurons could be found adjacent to strongly labeled ones. In contrast, we found that most neurons in DL strongly expressed AptFoxO3 mRNA, although there was only weak expression in a small number of cells within DC. We briefly discuss the relevance of our results regarding the functional roles of AptFoxP2/AptOtx1-expressing neurons in DC for communication vs. foraging behavior. We extensively discuss the implications of our results for possible homologies between DL and DC and medial and dorsal pallium of tetrapods, respectively.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".