Social snails: the effect of social isolation on cognition is dependent on environmental context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social isolation is often considered to have negative effects on cognitive function in a wide range of species. Here we assess how environmental context alters the effect of isolation on long-term memory formation (24 h) in the pond snail Lymnaea stagnalis. We operantly trained snails to reduce aerial respiration in hypoxia following exposure to one of three social conditions: (1) maintained and trained in groups; (2) maintained in groups, trained in isolation; or (3) maintained and trained in isolation. In addition, snails also experienced four stress exposure levels: control, exposure to low calcium availability, predator kairomone exposure during training or a combination of low calcium and predator kairomones. Snails isolated during training alone demonstrated no difference in memory formation compared with the snails trained in groups. Maintaining snails in social isolation for 8 days prior to training had a neutral effect on memory in control conditions or in the presence of predator kairomones alone. However, social isolation enhanced long-term memory formation in snails exposed to low calcium conditions, a stress that blocks memory formation in snails maintained in groups. Conversely, when exposed to low calcium and predator kairomones combined, grouped snails normally demonstrate long-term memory, but following maintenance in isolation long-term memory was blocked. Therefore, the effect of social isolation on cognitive function is highly dependent on the environmental context in which it is experienced.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".