Chicken and junglefowl cerebellar anatomy data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Domestication is the process by which wild organisms become adapted for human use. Many phenotypic changes are associated with animal domestication, including decreases in brain and brain region sizes. In contrast to this pattern, the chicken has a larger cerebellum compared with the wild red junglefowl, but what neuroanatomical changes are responsible for this difference have yet to be investigated. Here, we quantified cell layer volumes, neuron numbers and neuron sizes in the cerebella of chickens and junglefowl. Chickens have larger, more folded cerebella with more and larger granule cells than junglefowl, but neuron numbers and cerebellar folding were proportional to cerebellum size. However, chickens do have relatively larger granule cell layer volumes and relatively larger granule cells than junglefowl. Thus, the chicken cerebellum can be considered a scaled-up version of the junglefowl cerebellum, but with enlarged granule cells. The combination of scaling neuron number and disproportionate enlargement of cell bodies partially supports a recent theory that domestication does not affect neuronal density within brain regions. Whether the neuroanatomical changes we observed are typical of domestication or not requires similar quantitative analyses in other domesticated species and across multiple brain regions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.025 |
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".