Projections of the nucleus of the basal optic root in pigeons (<i>Columba livia</i>): A comparison of the morphology and distribution of neurons with different efferent projections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The avian nucleus of the basal optic root (nBOR) is a visual structure involved in the optokinetic response. nBOR consists of several morphologically distinct cell types, and in the present study, we sought to determine if these different cell types had differential projections. Using retrograde tracers, we examined the morphology and distribution of nBOR neurons projecting to the vestibulocerebellum (VbC), inferior olive (IO), dorsal thalamus, the pretectal nucleus lentiformis mesencephali (LM), the contralateral nBOR, the oculomotor complex (OMC) and a group of structures along the midline of the mesencephalon. The retrogradely labeled neurons fell into two broad categories: large neurons, most of which were multipolar rather than fusiform and small neurons, which were either fusiform or multipolar. From injections into the IO, LM, contralateral nBOR, and structures along the midline-mesencephalon small nBOR neurons were labeled. Although there were no differences with respect to the size of the labeled neurons from these injections, there were some differences with the respect to the distribution of labeled neurons and the proportion of multipolar vs. fusiform neurons. From injections into the VbC, the large multipolar cells were labeled throughout nBOR. The only other cases in which these large neurons were labeled were contralateral OMC injections. To investigate if single neurons project to multiple targets we used paired injections of red and green fluorescent retrograde tracers into different targets. Double-labeled neurons were never observed indicating that nBOR neurons do not project to multiple targets. We conclude that individual nBOR neurons have unique projections, which may have differential roles in processing optic flow and controlling the optokinetic response.
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".