Olfactory navigation during spawning migrations: a review and introduction of the Hierarchical Navigation Hypothesis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Migrations are characterized by periods of movement that typically rely on orientation towards directional cues. Anadromous fish undergo several different forms of oriented movement during their spawning migration and provide some of the most well-studied examples of migratory behaviour. During the freshwater phase of the migration, fish locate their spawning grounds via olfactory cues. In this review, we synthesize research that explores the role of olfaction during the spawning migration of anadromous fish, most of which focuses on two families: Salmonidae (salmonids) and Petromyzontidae (lampreys). We draw attention to limitations in this research, and highlight potential areas of investigation that will help fill in current knowledge gaps. We also use the information assembled from our review to formulate a new hypothesis for natal homing in salmonids. Our hypothesis posits that migrating adults rely on three types of cues in a hierarchical fashion: imprinted cues (primary), conspecific cues (secondary), and non-olfactory environmental cues (tertiary). We provide evidence from previous studies that support this hypothesis. We also discuss future directions of research that can test the hypothesis and further our understanding of the spawning migration.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it