MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016417329 · doi:10.1159/000337760

Eye Shape and Retinal Topography in Owls (Aves: Strigiformes)

2012· article· en· W2016417329 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Behavior and Evolution · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyNocturnalRetinaAnatomyGalliformesRetinalInterspecific competitionZoologyEcologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The eyes of vertebrates show adaptations to the visual environments in which they evolve. For example, eye shape is associated with activity pattern, while retinal topography is related to the symmetry or 'openness' of the habitat of a species. Although these relationships are well documented in many vertebrates including birds, the extent to which they hold true for species within the same avian order is not well understood. Owls (Strigiformes) represent an ideal group for the study of interspecific variation in the avian visual system because they are one of very few avian orders to contain species that vary in both activity pattern and habitat preference. Here, we examined interspecific variation in eye shape and retinal topography in nine species of owl. Eye shape (the ratio of corneal diameter to eye axial length) differed among species, with nocturnal species having relatively larger corneal diameters than diurnal species. All the owl species have an area of high retinal ganglion cell (RGC) density in the temporal retina and a visual streak of increased cell density extending across the central retina from temporal to nasal. However, the organization and degree of elongation of the visual streak varied considerably among species and this variation was quantified using H:V ratios. Species that live in open habitats and/or that are more diurnally active have well-defined, elongated visual streaks and high H:V ratios (3.88-2.33). In contrast, most nocturnal and/or forest-dwelling owls have a poorly defined visual streak, a more radially symmetrical arrangement of RGCs and lower H:V ratios (1.77-1.27). The results of a hierarchical cluster analysis indicate that the apparent interspecific variation is associated with activity pattern and habitat as opposed to the phylogenetic relationships among species. In seven species, the presence of a fovea was confirmed and it is suggested that all strigid owls may possess a fovea, whereas the tytonid barn owl (Tyto alba) does not. A size-frequency analysis of cell soma area indicates that a number of different RGC classes are represented in owls, including a population of large RGCs (cell soma area >150 µm(2)) that resemble the giant RGCs reported in other vertebrates. In conclusion, eye shape and retinal topography in owls vary among species and this variation is associated with different activity patterns and habitat preferences, thereby supporting similar observations in other vertebrates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it