Annual Cycle of the Black-Capped Chickadee: Seasonality of Food-Storing and the Hippocampus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous research presents a mixed picture of seasonal variation in the hippocampus of food-storing black-capped chickadees. One field study has shown an October peak in hippocampus volume, although laboratory studies conducted to determine whether photoperiod regulates this seasonal growth have failed to find changes in the size of the hippocampus. To resolve the discrepancy between field and lab reports we examined caching activity, hippocampal volume, and neurogenesis in adult male black-capped chickadees at four times over the annual cycle: October, January, April and July. We found that more birds stored food in October than at other times of year, but did not observe a significant change in the size of the hippocampus over the annual cycle. Telencephalon volume, however, was larger in October than in July. Hippocampal neuronal recruitment showed a significant peak in January, but there was no seasonal change in neuronal recruitment in the adjacent hyperpallium apicale. These results indicate that there might be seasonal variation in the recruitment of new neurons into the hippocampus of chickadees without overall seasonal change in hippocampal size.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".