Domestication and diversification: A comparative analysis of the play fighting of the Brown Norway, Sprague-Dawley, and Wistar laboratory strains of (Rattus norvegicus).
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laboratory strains of rats are a commonly used subject to study play behavior. Recent research has shown that play in one laboratory strain of rat (e.g., Long-Evans hooded) differs in a number of ways from its wild counterparts. These findings suggest that domestication affects some aspects of play behavior. However, there are multiple strains of laboratory rats, which have been domesticated through different lineages all derived from wild rats and it cannot be assumed that all domestic strains are identical in their play. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the play behavior of three other strains of laboratory rats (e.g., Wistar, Sprague-Dawley, and Brown Norway). All strains were similar to each other as they all engaged in high frequencies of play, tolerated similar interanimal distances before initiating playful defense and displayed similar acrobatic capacities, suggesting domestication produces some common changes in play and other factors that influence play. However, strains differed significantly from one another in the use of tactics that promote bodily contact during play. Indeed, in this regard, some strains were more similar to wild rats than others, suggesting that some domestication-induced changes are either unique or more prominent in some laboratory strains than others. Such a mosaic pattern of transformation not only offers the possibility of using strain differences to characterize the genetic factors contributing to different facets of play, but also cautions researchers from making rat-general conclusions from studies on any one strain.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it