Bibliographic record
Abstract
In vertebrates the neuroendocrine system is based on chemical signaling between neural and endocrine structures. Final outcomes may be realized via chemical messengers traveling through circulatory conduits to their specific target sites. This process may rely, in part, on neurosecretion of the signaling molecules. The complexity of this system can be readily visualized when one considers the way in which interactions among classical neurotransmitters, cytokines, growth factors, and neuroendocrine hormones, in combination with autocrine and paracrine communication, can regulate cells and tissues. Apart from the neuroendocrine system there is also neuroimmune communication, consisting of reciprocal signaling between neuroendocrine and immune cells, which use the same molecules to coordinate their activity. Thus, our concept of the neuroendocrine system is constantly growing, despite its complexity, but it may be simply summarized as allowing bidirectional communication between neural and endocrine structures over distances greater than that achieved by synaptic communication. In the light of this, I demonstrate in this review that annelids, which are considered "simple" animals, also possess a neuroendocrine system.
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".