Immunohistochemical Approach to Understanding the Organization of the Olfactory System in the Cuttlefish, <i>Sepia officinalis</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cephalopods are nontraditional but captivating models of invertebrate neurobiology, particularly in evolutionary comparisons. Cephalopod olfactory systems have striking similarities and fundamental differences with vertebrates, arthropods, and gastropods, raising questions about the ancestral origins of those systems. We describe here the organization and development of the olfactory system of the common cuttlefish, Sepia officinalis, using immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization. FMRFamide and/or related peptides and histamine are putative neurotransmitters in olfactory sensory neurons. Other neurotransmitters, including serotonin and APGWamide within the olfactory and other brain lobes, suggest efferent control of olfactory input and/or roles in the processing of olfactory information. The distributions of neurotransmitters, along with staining patterns of phalloidin, anti-acetylated α-tubulin, and a synaptotagmin riboprobe, help to clarify the structure of the olfactory lobe. We discuss a key difference, the lack of identifiable olfactory glomeruli, in cuttlefish in comparison to other models, and suggest its implications for the evolution of olfaction.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".