MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132987263

Hippocampal neurogenesis and spatial memory: postnatal neurogenesis in yellow-pine chipmunks and eastern grey squirrels

2004· dissertation· W7132987263 on OpenAlexafffund
Jennifer M. Barker

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2004
Typedissertation
Language
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsToronto ZooBibliographical Society of Canada
FundersUniversity of Toronto ScarboroughNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAmerican Society of Mammalogists
KeywordsDentate gyrusNeurogenesisHippocampal formationCorticosteroneHippocampus
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Postnatal neurogenesis in wild mammals may play an essential role in spatial memory. I compared two species that differ in their reliance on memory for where food is stored for future consumption. Yellow-pine chipmunks use a single cache to store winter food, whereas eastern grey squirrels use multiple storage sites. In chipmunks, the density of newborn cells in the dentate gyrus was negatively related to the plasma corticosterone concentration, and densities of newborn and young neurons were negatively related to the neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio. No such relationships were found in squirrels. I suggest that the independence in squirrels of cell densities and indicators of condition is an adaptation that prevents decreases in neurogenesis. As compared to chipmunks, squirrels had three times the density of newborn cells in the dentate gyrus, but did not differ in density of young neurons. I discuss four explanations to account for this inconsistency.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms→French-language works237,207→