Differences in diet-induced flexibility in morphology and growth in a partially migratory species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Partial migration, in which some individuals of a population migrate while other individuals remain resident, is generally associated with ontogenetic shifts to better feeding or as a response to adversity, but its underlying mechanisms remain relatively unknown. Brown trout (Salmo trutta) exhibit partial migration, with some individuals remaining in fresh water (freshwater-resident) while others undertake an anadromous migration, gain most of their adult size at sea, and then return to fresh water to spawn. The option adopted by an individual trout is thought to be partly determined by its growth performance in early life, which in the stochastic and dynamic environment of freshwater streams may be dependent on its flexibility. To examine potential effects of parent type on phenotypic flexibility, we measured the metabolism, growth, and morphology of full-sibling groups of offspring from freshwater-resident and anadromous parents both before and after a switch in diet. We found that fry had a higher growth rate and a more rounded head and body shape when reared on chironomid larvae compared with when they were reared on Daphnia, but diet had no effect on standard metabolic rate. Interestingly, offspring of anadromous parents were less able to maintain their growth rate when fed on Daphnia than were those of freshwater-residents and showed a correspondingly greater increase in growth following a switch from Daphnia to chironomid larvae. Offspring of anadromous parents also showed less morphological flexibility in response to diet than did the offspring of freshwater-residents. We discuss how the migration history of the parents might interact with phenotypic flexibility in early life to influence the migration probability of the offspring.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".