Role of Motor and Visual Experience During Development of Bipedal Locomotion in Chicks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this research was to investigate the role of motor and visual experience during the development of locomotion in chicks. We have previously demonstrated that when locomotor activity is restricted immediately posthatching, chicks walk with shorter stride lengths and attenuated head bobbing movements. Head bobbing is an optokinetic response in birds, driven by the movement of the visual world across the retina (i.e., optic flow). During locomotion, optic flow is generated by forward translation, and we have shown that the magnitude of head bobbing movements and stride lengths are moderately correlated in walking chicks. In the present study, we investigated this relationship more closely by examining whether imposed changes in stride length could affect head excursions during head bobbing. We manipulated stride length by hobbling chicks immediately after hatching and subsequently quantified kinematic parameters, including step timing and head excursions, during walking. Imposition of shorter stride lengths induced chicks to take more frequent steps, spend less time in contact with the ground, and shortened head excursions during head bobbing. Nevertheless, the developmental changes in head excursions were not fully accounted for by altered stride lengths, so in a separate experiment, we investigated whether the development of head bobbing relies on the normal experience of optic flow. We raised chicks under stroboscopic illumination to eliminate chicks' experience of optic flow but found that this did not significantly alter head bobbing. These results are discussed along with related findings in other species and the possible neural and biomechanical constraints underlying development of walking and head bobbing in birds.
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".