MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sites of respiratory rhythmogenesis during development in the tadpole

2001· article· en· W2276425809 on OpenAlexaff
Cory Torgerson, M. J. Gdovin, John E. Remmers

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetamorphosisTadpole (physics)BiologyAmphibianNeuroscienceRanaLungAnatomyVentilation (architecture)LarvaInternal medicineEcologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During ontogeny, amphibian larvae experience a dramatic alteration in the motor act of breathing as the premetamorphic gill breather develops into the postmetamorphic lung ventilator. We tested the hypothesis that the site of lung rhythmogenesis relocates during metamorphosis by recording fictive lung ventilation before and after transecting the in vitro brain stem of pre- and postmetamorphic Rana catesbeiana into four segments. In premetamorphic tadpoles, the two caudalmost brain stem segments combined proved to be the minimum brain stem configuration necessary and sufficient for lung burst generation. In the postmetamorphic counterpart, this function was supplied by the combination of the two rostralmost brain stem segments. In the postmetamorphic brain stem, a 500-microm segment lying just rostral to cranial nerve IX conveys rhythmogenic capability to neighboring rostral or caudal segments. We conclude that lung rhythmogenic capability translocates rostrally during development as the tadpole shifts from gill to lung ventilation.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations53
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative PhysiologySame topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleepFrench-language works237,207