Brain Regions and Encephalization in Anurans: Adaptation or Stability?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relative brain size and the relative size of six brain regions (main olfactory bulbs, accessory olfactory bulbs, telencephalon, optic tectum, cerebellum and brain stem) in ten species of anurans from five habitats were examined to determine whether there was any evidence of adaptation in brain structure. A previously published data set was also reanalysed. Arboreal frogs have larger body-size corrected brains than frogs from other habitats. Arboreal ranid (Platymantis vitiensis) and hylid (Hyla versicolor) possess slightly larger cerebella than the ranids and hylids from other habitats. Platymantis vitiensis lacks an accessory olfactory bulb. The fully-aquatic Xenopus laevis (Pipidae) has a smaller optic tectum and cerebellum than the non-fossorial hylids and ranids. Adaptation to life underground appears to explain the modified brains of two fossorial frogs, Hemisus guineensis (Ranidae) and Rhinophrynus dorsalis (Rhinophrynidae). Both species of fossorial frogs have reduced optic tecta, larger main olfactory and smaller accessory olfactory bulbs, and larger torus semicircularis than non-fossorial species. Our data showed a strong negative correlation between the size of the optic tectum and the size of the main olfactory bulbs. We conclude that, although anuran brains are very similar across taxa in qualitative and general structure, there are some interesting, apparent adaptations, to fossorial and arboreal life.
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.
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 it