Mammalian Retinal Bipolar Cells: Morphological Identification and Systematic Classification in Rabbit Retina With a Comparative Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Retinal bipolar cells (BCs) convey visual signals from photoreceptors to more than 50 types of rabbit retinal ganglion cells (Famiglietti, 2020). More than 40 years ago, 10-11 types of bipolar cells were recognized in rabbit and cat retinas (Famiglietti, 1981). Twenty years later, 10 were identified in mouse, rat, and monkey, while recent molecular genetic studies indicate that there are 15 types of bipolar cell in mouse retina (Shekhar et al., 2016). The present detailed study of more than 800 bipolar cells in 11 Golgi-impregnated rabbit retinas indicates that there are 14-16 types of cone bipolar cell and one type of rod bipolar cell in rabbit retina. These have been carefully analyzed in terms of dendritic and axonal morphology and axon terminal stratification with respect to fiducial starburst amacrine cells. In fortuitous proximity, several types of bipolar cell can be related to identified ganglion cells by stratification and by contacts suggestive of synaptic connection. These results are compared with other studies of rabbit bipolar cells. Homologies with bipolar cells of mouse and monkey are considered in functional terms.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".