MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415405376 · doi:10.1093/iob/obaf037

Fear of Predators Suppresses Neurogenesis in the Brains of Wild Songbirds

2025· article· en· W4415405376 on OpenAlexafffund
Lauren E Witterick, Sandra T. Davidge, Emma Caroline Hobbs, Scott A. MacDougall‐Shackleton, Michael Clinchy, Liana Zanette

Bibliographic record

VenueIntegrative Organismal Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNeurogenesisHippocampal formationAmygdalaPredatorPredationHippocampus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synopsis Fear of predation can lead to behavioral changes indicative of an enduring memory of fear, as acknowledged by both ecologists and biomedical scientists studying post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Enduring memories are often linked to suppressed neurogenesis in laboratory rodents as a potential mechanism to prevent the replacement of existing memories. We used predator vocalizations to assess the enduring effects of fear on neurogenesis in a wild songbird, black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus), quantifying cell proliferation (PCNA immunoreactivity), and immature neurons (doublecortin immunoreactivity) in both sexes. Seven days after predator cue exposure, we found suppression of hippocampal cell proliferation in males, with no effect in females, and suppression of immature neurons in the avian amygdala (medial ventral arcopallium) in both sexes. Our results are consistent with the hypothesis that animals retained an enduring memory of fear, with potential sex differences in the behavioral and ecological consequences of these enduring neuronal changes. Finding effects indicative of an enduring memory of fear in wild caught animals supports the notion that there may be evolutionarily adaptive value to retaining an enduring, PTSD-like memory.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntegrative Organismal BiologySame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207