MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162722512 · doi:10.1242/jeb.010173

Predator detection in<i>Lymnaea stagnalis</i>

2007· article· en· W2162722512 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Orr, Malik El-Bekai, Melissa Lui, K Watson, Ken Lukowiak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLymnaea stagnalisPredatorCrayfishBiologyLymnaeaEscape responseZoologyRespirationEcologyAnatomyPredationSnail

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laboratory-reared Lymnaea are capable of detecting and responding to the scent of a crayfish predator. The present investigation is a first attempt to characterize multiple stress-related behavioural responses resulting from predator detection and to depict the neurophysiological correlates of one of these illustrated behaviours. Snails respond to crayfish effluent (CE) by increasing the following behaviours: aerial respiration, exploratory/searching phase and sensitivity to the shadow-elicited full-body withdrawal response. In contrast, when snails detect CE they decrease both their righting response time when dislodged from the substratum and their basal cutaneous oxygen consumption. Interestingly, basal heart rate does not change in response to CE exposure. Finally, we directly measured the activity of the neuron that initiates aerial respiratory behaviour, RPeD1, in semi-intact preparations. Naïve snails exposed to CE prior to recording demonstrated both a significantly reduced spontaneous firing rate and fewer bouts of bursting activity compared with non-exposed snails. These data show that laboratory-reared Lymnaea that have never experienced a natural predator are still capable of detecting and responding to the presence of a historically sympatric predator. These data open a new avenue of research, which may allow a direct investigation from the behavioural to the neuronal level as to how an ecologically relevant stressful stimulus alters behaviour.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations95
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BiologySame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207