What can we teach <i>Lymnaea</i> and what can <i>Lymnaea</i> teach us?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review describes the advantages of adopting a molluscan complementary model, the freshwater snail Lymnaea stagnalis, to study the neural basis of learning and memory in appetitive and avoidance classical conditioning; as well as operant conditioning of its aerial respiratory and escape behaviour. We firstly explored 'what we can teach Lymnaea' by discussing a variety of sensitive, solid, easily reproducible and simple behavioural tests that have been used to uncover the memory abilities of this model system. Answering this question will allow us to open new frontiers in neuroscience and behavioural research to enhance our understanding of how the nervous system mediates learning and memory. In fact, from a translational perspective, Lymnaea and its nervous system can help to understand the neural transformation pathways from behavioural output to sensory coding in more complex systems like the mammalian brain. Moving on to the second question: 'what can Lymnaea teach us?', it is now known that Lymnaea shares important associative learning characteristics with vertebrates, including stimulus generalization, generalization of extinction and discriminative learning, opening the possibility to use snails as animal models for neuroscience translational research.
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".