Effects of ghrelin on food caching behaviour and body composition in black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several metabolic hormones signal an organism's energy balance to the brain and modulate feeding behaviours accordingly. These metabolic signals may also regulate other behaviour related to energy balance, such as food caching or hoarding. Ghrelin is one such hormone, but it appears to exert different effects on appetite and fat levels in birds and mammals. Ghrelin treatment inhibits food intake and decreases fat stores in some bird species, but these effects may differ between acylated and unacylated (des-acyl) forms of ghrelin. The effect of ghrelin on food caching in birds has been examined in only one study, that found both leptin and unacylated ghrelin reduced food caching and mass gain in coal tits (Periparus ater). We expanded on this to test how both forms of ghrelin affect food caching and body composition in black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus). We injected each bird with acylated ghrelin, unacylated ghrelin, and a saline control and then measured food caching every 20 min for two hours post-injection. We also measured body mass fat levels the day before, and after treatment using quantitative magnetic resonance (QMR). Contrary to prior work, we found no effects of either form of ghrelin on food caching, or body or fat mass. Future work is required to determine if the difference between our results and those of the prior study stems from species differences in response to ghrelin and/or in the motivation to cache food, or ghrelin effects being modulated by energy reserves.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".