MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Where's my dinner? Adult neurogenesis in free‐living food‐storing rodents

2004· article· en· W2158828550 on OpenAlexafffund
Jennifer M. Barker, J. Martin Wojtowicz, Rudy Boonstra

Bibliographic record

VenueGenes Brain & Behavior · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsNeurogenesisDoublecortinBiologyRodentDentate gyrusImmunostainingHippocampal formationHippocampusPopulationNeuroscienceZoologyEcologyImmunohistochemistryImmunologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Postnatal hippocampal neurogenesis in wild mammals may play an essential role in spatial memory. We compared two species that differ in their reliance on memory to locate stored food. Yellow-pine chipmunks use a single cache to store winter food; eastern gray squirrels use multiple storage sites. Gray squirrels had three times the density of proliferating cells in the dentate gyrus (determined by Ki-67 immunostaining) than that found in chipmunks, but similar density of young neurons (determined by doublecortin immunostaining). Three explanations may account for these results. First, the larger population of young cells in squirrels may increase the flexibility of the spatial memory system by providing a larger pool of cells from which new neurons can be recruited. Second, squirrels may have a more rapid cell turnover rate. Third, many young cells in the squirrels may mature into glia rather than neurons. The densities of young neurons were higher in juveniles than in adults of both species. The relationship between adult age and cell density was more complex than that has been found in captive populations. In adult squirrels, the density of proliferating cells decreased exponentially with age, whereas in adult chipmunks the density of young neurons decreased exponentially with age.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations63
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenes Brain & BehaviorSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207