Infant ultrasonic vocalizations and parental responses in two species of voles (<i>Microtus</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When separated from conspecifics, the young of many rodent species produce ultrasonic vocalizations (USVs) that may facilitate parental approach. Ultrasounds were recorded from infants (014 days post partum) of two closely related species that exhibit different social systems, the montane vole (Microtus montanus) and the prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster). Infant prairie voles emitted a greater number of USVs when isolated from conspecifics than did infant montane voles. Infant prairie voles also emitted a greater number of USVs in the presence of a parent than did infant montane voles. For both species, parental responses to individual infants were most rapid when pups were at those ages when they emitted the greatest numbers of USVs. Prairie vole parents approached pups most rapidly on days 68, whereas montane vole parents approached pups most rapidly on days 1214. There were no differences between sires and dams of either species in their latencies to approach and contact pups. In general, however, infants of both species were retrieved more rapidly by dams than by sires. We suggest that differences in ultrasound production among vole species may correlate with differences in their species-specific social systems. It appears that the number of USVs produced by pups may vary with the amount of parent-pup contact typical of each 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".