Zonal organization of the vestibulocerebellum in pigeons (<i>Columba livia</i>): II. Projections of the rotation zones of the flocculus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous neurophysiologic research in birds and mammals has shown that there are two types of Purkinje cells in the flocculus. The first type shows maximal modulation in response to rotational optokinetic stimulation about the vertical axis (rVA neurons). The second type shows maximal modulation in response to rotational optokinetic stimulation about a horizontal axis oriented 45 degrees to contralateral azimuth (rH45c neurons). In pigeons, the rVA and rH45c are organized into four alternating parasagittal zones. In this study we investigated the projections of Purkinje cells in the rVA and rH45c zones by using the anterograde tracers biotinylated dextran amine and cholera toxin subunit B. After iontophoretic injections of tracers into the rH45c zones, heavy anterograde labeling was found in the infracerebellar nucleus and the medial margin of the superior vestibular nucleus. Some labeling was also consistently observed in the lateral cerebellar nucleus and the dorsolateral vestibular nucleus. After injections into the rVA zones, heavy anterograde labeling was found in the medial and descending vestibular nuclei, the nucleus prepositus hypoglossi, and the central region of the superior vestibular nucleus. Less labeling was seen in the tangential nucleus, the dorsolateral vestibular nucleus, and the lateral vestibular nucleus, pars ventralis. These results are compared and contrasted with findings in mammalian 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 | 0.000 | 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".