MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055472934 · doi:10.1159/000084313

The Evolution of Cerebrotypes in Birds

2005· article· en· W2055472934 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew N. Iwaniuk, Peter L. Hurd

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Behavior and Evolution · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyPrecocialZoologyGeneralist and specialist speciesAltricialWaterfowlPhylogenetic treeCladeBrain sizeEvolutionary biologyEcologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multivariate analyses of brain composition in mammals, amphibians and fish have revealed the evolution of 'cerebrotypes' that reflect specific niches and/or clades. Here, we present the first demonstration of similar cerebrotypes in birds. Using principal component analysis and hierarchical clustering methods to analyze a data set of 67 species, we demonstrate that five main cerebrotypes can be recognized. One type is dominated by galliforms and pigeons, among other species, that all share relatively large brainstems, but can be further differentiated by the proportional size of the cerebellum and telencephalic regions. The second cerebrotype contains a range of species that all share relatively large cerebellar and small nidopallial volumes. A third type is composed of two species, the tawny frogmouth (Podargus strigoides) and an owl, both of which share extremely large Wulst volumes. Parrots and passerines, the principal members of the fourth group, possess much larger nidopallial, mesopallial and striatopallidal proportions than the other groups. The fifth cerebrotype contains species such as raptors and waterfowl that are not found at the extremes for any of the brain regions and could therefore be classified as 'generalist' brains. Overall, the clustering of species does not directly reflect the phylogenetic relationships among species, but there is a tendency for species within an order to clump together. There may also be a weak relationship between cerebrotype and developmental differences, but two of the main clusters contained species with both altricial and precocial developmental patterns. As a whole, the groupings do agree with behavioral and ecological similarities among species. Most notably, species that share similarities in locomotor behavior, mode of prey capture or cognitive ability are clustered together. The relationship between cerebrotype and behavior/ecology in birds suggests that future comparative studies of brain-behavior relationships will benefit from adopting a multivariate approach.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.277
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations207
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain Behavior and EvolutionSame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207