Olfactory epithelium ontogenesis and function in postembryonic North American Bullfrog (<i>Rana</i> (<i>Lithobates</i>) <i>catesbeiana</i>) tadpoles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During metamorphosis, the olfactory system remodelling in anuran tadpoles — to transition from detecting waterborne odorants to volatile odorants as frogs — is extensive. How the olfactory system transitions from the larval to frog form is poorly understood, particularly in species that become (semi-)terrestrial. We investigated the ontogeny and function of the olfactory epithelium of North American Bullfrog (Rana (Lithobates) catesbeiana Shaw, 1802) tadpoles at various stages of postembryonic development. Changes in sensory components observable at the epithelial surface were examined by scanning electron microscopy. Functionality of the developing epithelium was tested using a neurophysiological technique (electro-olfactography (EOG)), and behaviourally, using a choice maze to assess tadpole response to olfactory stimuli (algae extract, amino acids). The youngest (premetamorphic) tadpoles responded behaviourally to an amino acid mixture despite having underdeveloped olfactory structures (cilia, olfactory knobs) and no EOG response. The consistent appearance of olfactory structures in older (prometamorphic) tadpoles coincided with reliably obtaining EOG responses to olfactory stimuli. However, as tadpoles aged further, and despite indistinguishable differences in sensory components, behavioural- and EOG-based olfactory responses were drastically reduced, most strongly near metamorphic climax. This work demonstrates a more complex relationship between structure and function of the olfactory system during tadpole life history than originally thought.
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".