MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105226123 · doi:10.1242/jeb.098574

Weakly electric fish give behavioral responses to envelopes naturally occurring during movement: implications for neural processing

2013· article· en· W2105226123 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael G. Metzen, Maurice J. Chacron

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish biology, ecology, and behavior
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsElectric fishFish <Actinopterygii>Movement (music)NeuroscienceBiologyCommunicationPsychologyPhysicsFisheryAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How the brain processes natural sensory input remains an important and poorly understood problem in neuroscience. The efficient coding hypothesis asserts that the brain's coding strategies are adapted to the statistics of natural stimuli in order to efficiently process them, thereby optimizing their perception by the organism. Here we examined whether gymnotiform weakly electric fish displayed behavioral responses that are adapted to the statistics of the natural electrosensory envelopes. Previous studies have shown that the envelopes resulting from movement tend to consist of low (<1 Hz) temporal frequencies and are behaviorally relevant whereas those resulting from social interactions consist of higher (>1 Hz) temporal frequencies that can thus mask more behaviorally relevant signals. We found that the self-generated electric organ discharge frequency follows the detailed time course of the envelope around a mean value that is positively offset with respect to its baseline value for temporal frequencies between 0.001 Hz and 1 Hz. The frequency-following component of this behavioral response decreased in magnitude as a power law as a function of the envelope frequency and was negligible for envelope frequencies above 1 Hz. In contrast, the offset component was relatively constant and somewhat increased for envelope frequencies above 1 Hz. Thus, our results show that weakly electric fish display behavioral responses that track the detailed time course of low but not high frequency envelope stimuli. Furthermore, we found that the magnitude of the frequency-following behavioral response matches, in a one-to-one fashion, the spectral power of natural second-order stimulus attributes observed during movement. Indeed, both decayed as a power law with the same exponent for temporal frequencies spanning three orders of magnitude. Thus, our findings suggest that the neural coding strategies used by weakly electric fish perceive the detailed time course of movement envelopes and are adapted to their statistics as found in the natural environment. They also suggest that weakly electric fish might take advantage of the differential frequency content of movement and social envelopes in order to give appropriate behavioral responses during encounters between two or more conspecifics.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations44
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BiologySame topicFish biology, ecology, and behaviorFrench-language works237,207