Development, Organization and Plasticity of the Zebrafish Olfactory System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Olfaction is vitally important to animals in all environments and is used to identify\nfood, habitat, conspecifics and predators. Some odors, like pheromones or the pungent\nsmell of spoiled foods, can trigger pre-existing behavioral responses that appear to\nrequire no learning. Most odors, however, are only attended to as a result of prior\nexperience. It is believed that different types of odors are processed in different olfactory\npathways in the forebrain. This thesis examines the relationship between innate and\nlearned olfactory behaviors and the anatomy of the neural pathways that underlie them,\nusing the zebrafish olfactory system as a model.\nI first characterized an appetitive olfactory behavior, which is displayed promptly\nby zebrafish when they encounter amino acid odors. A similar appetitive behavior can\nalso be learned by the fish for another, initially neutral odorant, if it is repeatedly paired\nwith food rewards. Zebrafish can therefore respond to, and learn to respond to certain\nodors. I then conducted an in-depth anatomical analysis of the structure and distribution\nof glomeruli in the zebrafish olfactory system. Glomeruli are spheroidal synaptic\naggregates that organize and shape olfactory information that arrives in the brain.\nThroughout the development of zebrafish, I identified two distinct populations of\nglomeruli. One population consisted of 25 individually identifiable, anatomically\nstereotypic glomeruli that closely resembled specialized glomeruli in mammals and\ninsects. These glomeruli were already formed during embryonic development and\npersisted in remarkably stable configurations throughout later developmental stages. I\nhypothesize that the 25 individually identifiable glomeruli constitute stable olfactory\npathways (i.e., for innate olfactory behaviors). Most glomeruli, however, were\nanatomically variable and displayed different distributions within coarsely circumscribed\nregions in the zebrafish olfactory bulbs. The development of these glomeruli could be\nmodified by sensory experience, suggesting that they may comprise plastic olfactory\npathways that subserve the establishment of learned olfactory behaviors. Collectively my\nresults show that innate and learned olfactory behaviors may indeed be represented in\ndifferent olfactory pathways, and that these types of pathways may be located in both\nmain and accessory olfactory systems.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".