MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109654327 · doi:10.1111/azo.12068

Confocal imaging and phylogenetic considerations of the subcutaneous neurons in the Atlantic hagfish <i>Myxine glutinosa</i>

2014· article· en· W2109654327 on OpenAlexaff
Giacomo Zaccone, Douglas S. Fudge, Timothy M. Winegard, Gioele Capillo, Michał Kuciel, Kengo Funakoshi, Eugenia Rita Lauriano

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Zoologica · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHagfishBiologyAnatomyConfocalFree nerve endingPlexusCell bodiesConfocal microscopyImmunohistochemistryCentral nervous systemPathologyVertebrateNeuroscienceCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We used confocal microscopy and immunohistochemistry to characterize the morphology of the subcutaneous neurons and the innervation of the slime glands and striated muscles in the hagfish Myxine glutinosa. A rich plexus of 5HT‐, ChAT‐ and TH‐positive neurons is described in the capsule of the slime glands. These neurons, like those of the subcutaneous plexus, receive pericellular terminations from the axons of central cells. Capsular neurons receive innervation from 5HT‐positive and nNOS ‐positive nerve fibres. Other nerve endings belonging to two separate nerve populations are identified in the striated muscles. They contain TH and nNOS immunoreactivity. Due to the lack of any topographical labelling, the cell origin and the projections of the neurons into the cranial and spinal nerves are unknown. This study provides anatomical evidence of multiple (5HT and nNOS ) peripheral innervation of the neurons. However, it does not provide information about the function of these neurons in the hagfish. We suggest that hagfish neurons have a phylogenetic relationship with the spinal group of the dorsal cells of lampreys and the supramedullary cells of teleosts.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations23
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa ZoologicaSame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207