Are external head measurements a reliable predictor of brain size in the Common Quail (<i>Coturnix coturnix</i>)?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comparative research conducted during the past two decades revealed ecological and evolutionary consequences of interspecies differences in relation to brain size. However, relatively much fewer studies have focused on intraspecific variation in brain sizes. This may arise from the lack of a reliable and universal methodology to estimate brain size that can be employed in wild populations in vivo and in a minimally invasive manner. Here, we assessed whether variation in brain mass of Common Quails ( Coturnix coturnix (Linnaeus, 1758)) was predicted by external measurements of the head. Contrary to previous work, we found that the height of the head and not the volume of the head was the best predictor of brain mass in the Common Quail. However, we found that the height of the head explained only a relatively small proportion of variance in brain masses (i.e., 74.4%). Our data suggest that the external measurements of the head may not represent a universally applicable methodology to estimate brain sizes in birds and should, therefore, be used cautiously and validated for the studied species.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".