MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406641185 · doi:10.1098/rsbl.2024.0596

Avian telencephalon and cerebellum volumes can be accurately estimated from digital brain endocasts

2025· article· en· W4406641185 on OpenAlexaff
Aubrey R. Keirnan, Felipe Cunha, Sara Citron, Gavin J. Prideaux, Andrew N. Iwaniuk, Vera Weisbecker

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersAustralian Research Council
KeywordsEndocastCerebrumBiologyBrain sizeCerebellumAnatomyNeuroscienceCentral nervous systemMagnetic resonance imagingSkull

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For studies of the evolution of vertebrate brain anatomy and potentially associated behaviours, reconstructions of digital brain endocasts from computed tomography scans have revolutionized our capacity to collect neuroanatomical data. However, measurements from digital endocasts must be validated as reflecting actual brain anatomy, which is difficult because the collection of soft tissue information through histology is laborious and time-consuming. In birds, the reliability of digital endocast measurements as volume proxies for the two largest brain regions-the telencephalon and cerebellum-remains to be validated despite their use as proxies, e.g. of cognitive performance or flight ability. We here use the largest dataset of histology and digital endocasts to date, including 136 species from 25 avian orders, to compare digital endocast surface area measurements with actual brain volumes of the telencephalon, cerebellum and whole-brain endocast. Using linear and phylogenetically informed regression analyses, we demonstrate that endocast surfaces are strongly correlated with their brain volume counterparts for both absolute and relative size. This provides empirical support for using endocast-derived cerebellar and telencephalic surface areas in existing and future studies of living and extinct birds, with potential to expand to the dinosaur-bird transition in the future.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology LettersSame topicPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyFrench-language works237,207