A Map of Distal Leg Motor Neurons in the Thoracic Ganglia of Four Decapod Crustacean Species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe the numbers, central positions, and axonal exit routes of the distal leg motor neurons of four decapod species: squat lobsters (Munida quadrispina), spiny sand crabs (Blepharipoda occidentalis), mole sand crabs (Emerita analoga), and signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus). As predicted by previous physiological and anatomical identification of axons at the periphery in crayfish and lobsters, cobalt backfills reveal about seventeen cell bodies, which are found in four areas in the ganglion. By comparing their positions and neurite morphologies with the previously identified neurons, functional identifications could be assigned to most of them. The common inhibitor and stretcher inhibitor are located posterior-medial. An anterior-lateral cluster of about twelve somata includes the opener identical to stretcher excitor, one of two bender excitors (bender excitor alpha), four flexor excitors, and two excitors each to the extensor, reductor, and closer muscles. Three cell bodies are posterior-lateral. Of these, the opener inhibitor and the second bender excitor (bender excitor beta) are on about the same dorsoventral plane. The third posterior-lateral cell, the accessory flexor excitor, is noticeably more dorsal than the other two posterior-lateral cell bodies. The reductor muscle is innervated by at least three neurons: the putative common inhibitor and fast and slow excitors. None of the leg motor neurons project into the contralateral hemiganglion. The most variable feature across species is the nerve through which motor axons exit the ganglion: axons leave the ganglia via different routes in each of the four species examined. These differences in the axons' pathway, however, are insufficient to explain the differences in motor output and behaviour of these four 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 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".