MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142475174 · doi:10.1002/cne.20756

Central projections of auditory receptor neurons of crickets

2005· article· en· W2142475174 on OpenAlexaff
Kazuo Imaizumi, Gerald S. Pollack

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Comparative Neurology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe the central projections of physiologically characterized auditory receptor neurons of crickets as revealed by confocal microscopy. Receptors tuned to ultrasonic frequencies (similar to those produced by echolocating, insectivorous bats), to a mid-range of frequencies, and a subset of those tuned to low, cricket-like frequencies have similar projections, terminating medially within the auditory neuropile. Quantitative analysis shows that despite the general similarity of these projections they are tonotopic, with receptors tuned to lower frequencies terminating more medially. Another subset of cricket-song-tuned receptors projects more laterally and posteriorly than the other types. Double-fills of receptors and identified interneurons show that the three medially projecting receptor types are anatomically well positioned to provide monosynaptic input to interneurons that relay auditory information to the brain and to interneurons that modify this ascending information. The more laterally and posteriorly branching receptor type may not interact directly with this ascending pathway, but is well positioned to provide direct input to an interneuron that carries auditory information to more posterior ganglia. These results suggest that information about cricket song is segregated into functionally different pathways as early as the level of receptor neurons. Ultrasound-tuned and mid-frequency tuned receptors have approximately twice as many varicosities, which are sites of transmitter release, per receptor as either anatomical type of cricket-song-tuned receptor. This may compensate in part for the numerical under-representation of these receptor types.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.505

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations29
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Comparative NeurologySame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207