Top-down regression of the avian oviduct during late oviposition in a small passerine bird
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Egg production in oviparous vertebrates is assumed to be costly but the physiological basis of any costs remains unknown. The avian oviduct is a highly differentiated linear organ, with five functionally specific regions. Here we show that the oviduct regresses rapidly "from the top down" as soon as the more proximal regions have completed their function but while the distal regions still retain an oviductal egg. In zebra finches Taeniopygia guttata, oviduct mass did not differ between early laying birds at the 1-egg stage compared with late-laying birds (with one remaining yolky follicle; dry mass, 151-167 mg). However, in birds with no remaining yolky follicles but with an oviductal egg, oviduct mass decreased to 94 mg (44%). Regression occurred unequally among different regions of the oviduct, with significant decreases in the proximal infundibulum/magnum and isthmus regions (59% and 40%, respectively), but no change in distal shell gland/vagina mass. The shell gland did not regress until after the last oviposition. Thus, the avian oviduct has a highly regulated size-function relationship consistent with a high maintenance energy cost for this organ. We suggest that oviduct function is a significant contributor to the physiological costs of egg production and might mediate individual variation in maternal effects associated with non-yolk components of egg quality (e.g. immunoglobulins, lysozyme).
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".