Flawed mothering or infant signaling? The effects of deficient acoustic cues on ovine maternal response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The neonate distress cry, which displays a similar acoustic structure across a range of mammalian species, is highly effective in attracting, even compelling, parental care. However, if this cry is defective, as found in human and rodent neonates with poor neurobehavioral function, is the signal less enticing? Using playback recordings of a ewe's own co-twins as stimuli in a two choice test, we compared the preference of each sheep dam for acoustic features of lamb distress calls to assess the impact of signal quality on maternal response. The results of this study indicate that lamb vocalizations with acoustic parameters reflecting poor vocal fold engagement and arousal were less likely to be preferred by their dam. Additionally, these calls were associated with delayed vocal initiation and poor infant survival behavior suggestive of subtle cognitive deficit; and support the possibility that, as in deer and rodents, ovine vocalizations within a specific fundamental frequency range may well be a trigger for optimal maternal behavior. This research has important implications for understanding failed maternal-young interactions in ungulate and other species, and for verifying standardization of infant stimuli used in maternal behavior studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".