Discrete somatotopic representation and neural response properties in hummingbird and zebra finch forebrain nuclei
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Somatosensation allows animals to perceive the external world through touch, providing critical information about physical contact, temperature, pain, and body position. Somatosensory pathways, particularly those related to the rodent vibrissae, have been well-studied in mammals, illuminating principles of cortical organization and sensory processing 1,2 . However, comparative studies across diverse vertebrate species are imperative to understand how somatosensory systems are shaped by evolutionary pressures and specialized ecological needs. Birds provide an excellent model for studying the evolution of somatosensation, as they exhibit remarkable diversity in body plans, sensory capabilities, and behavior. Prior work in pigeons 3-6 , parrots 7 , and finches 8 have identified general tactile-responsive regions within the avian telencephalon. Yet how somatosensory maps and response properties vary across key avian groups remains unclear. Here, we aimed to elucidate somatotopic organization and neural coding in the telencephalon of Anna’s hummingbirds ( Calypte anna ) and zebra finches ( Taeniopygia guttata) . Using in vivo extracellular electrophysiological techniques, we recorded single and multi-unit activity in telencephalic regions of anesthetized hummingbirds and finches. We stimulated the beak, face, trunk, wings, and hindlimbs with controlled tactile stimuli and mapped somatosensory receptive fields. We found distinct representations of body regions distributed across multiple somatosensory zones, with surprising differences in relative areas devoted to key body surfaces, potentially as related to behavioral significance. Highlights □ Somatosensation provides birds with critical information for behaviors necessary to survival including foraging and flight. □ In vivo extracellular physiological recordings were used to monitor tactile responses in contralateral forebrain nuclei corresponding to the feather deflection in hummingbirds and finches including to air puff stimuli. □ Both hummingbirds and finches show distinct separation of body and head receptive field representation in different nuclei. □ A continuous somatotopic arrangement can be found in both the rostral Wulst (corresponding to the wings and body) and in nucleus basorostralis (corresponding to the head and beak), with particularly enlarged representations of the wing leading edge and the foot.
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".