Socially synchronized circadian oscillators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Daily rhythms of physiology and behaviour are governed by an endogenous timekeeping mechanism (a circadian 'clock'). The alternation of environmental light and darkness synchronizes (entrains) these rhythms to the natural day-night cycle, and underlying mechanisms have been investigated using singly housed animals in the laboratory. But, most species ordinarily would not live out their lives in such seclusion; in their natural habitats, they interact with other individuals, and some live in colonies with highly developed social structures requiring temporal synchronization. Social cues may thus be critical to the adaptive function of the circadian system, but elucidating their role and the responsible mechanisms has proven elusive. Here, we highlight three model systems that are now being applied to understanding the biology of socially synchronized circadian oscillators: the fruitfly, with its powerful array of molecular genetic tools; the honeybee, with its complex natural society and clear division of labour; and, at a different level of biological organization, the rodent suprachiasmatic nucleus, site of the brain's circadian clock, with its network of mutually coupled single-cell oscillators. Analyses at the 'group' level of circadian organization will likely generate a more complex, but ultimately more comprehensive, view of clocks and rhythms and their contribution to fitness in nature.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".