Timing of developmental stress and phenotypic plasticity: Effects of nutritional stress at different developmental periods on physiological and cognitive-behavioral traits in the zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Developmentally plastic organisms can respond to stressful environmental conditions by altering multiple aspects of their phenotype, often in a permanent fashion. The timing of developmental stress influences these phenotypic alterations because the prioritization of resources to traits necessary to overcome the stressor may be costly for the development of other traits. Despite the importance of this timing, few studies in birds have accounted for it, and those that have usually examined the effect on a single or few variables. This dissertation addresses the outstanding issues regarding i) the effects of timing of developmental stress on developmental plasticity, and ii) the extent to which poor nutritional conditions, as opposed to changes in nutritional conditions, drive phenotypic plasticity. Using zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata) as my study species, I manipulated food accessibility during early and or juvenile development (i.e. before and after nutritional independence) and measured various physiological and cognitive-behavioral traits. Results indicated that timing of stress significantly affected many (but not all) aspects of phenotype measured, including growth rates, body composition, immune function, associative learning, spatial memory, and endocrine function. In particular, nutritional stress during the juvenile period appeared to have strong programming effects on phenotype. Nevertheless, individual differences and sex differences in developmental plasticity greatly moderated the influence that timing of stress had on phenotypic development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".