Tectothalamic visual projections in turtles: Their cells of origin revealed by tracing methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In two species of turtle (Emys orbicularis and Testudo horsfieldi), retrograde and anterograde tracer techniques were used to study projections from the optic tectum to the nucleus rotundus (Rot) and to the dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (GLd). The ipsilateral Rot received the most massive tectal projections, stemming from numerous neurons located in the stratum griseum centrale (SGC). These neurons varied in size and shape, many of them having a wide zone of dendritic arborization within both the (SGC) and the stratum griseum et fibrosum superficiale (SGFS). Projections from the tectum to the GLd were ipsilateral, were extremely scarce, and arose from a small number of neurons of various shapes situated in the SGFS; these cells were, as a rule, smaller than those projecting to the Rot. For the most part, these neurons were radially oriented, with rather restricted dendritic arborizations in the most superficial sublayers of the SGFS; smaller numbers of projection neurons were horizontally oriented, with long dendrites branching throughout the layer. Some neurons located in the stratum griseum periventriculare (SGP) projected to both the Rot and the GLd. Most of these neurons had dendritic arborizations within the retinorecipient zone of the SGFS. We were unable to rule out the possibility that some cells projecting to the GLd were situated in the SGC. Both the GLd and the main body of the Rot did not contain neurons projecting to the optic tectum. Thalamic neurons projecting to the tectum were observed in the ventral lateral geniculate nucleus, the intergeniculate leaflet and the interstitial nuclei of the tectothalamic tract, and the nucleus of the decussatio supraoptica ventralis. The question of whether variation in the laminar organization of the tectorotundal and tectogeniculate projection neurons in reptiles, birds, and mammals may be related to different degrees of differentiation of the tectal layers is discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".