Interpopulation Differences in Shoaling Behaviour in Guppies (Poecilia reticulata): Roles of Social Environment and Population Origin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Trinidad, guppies (Poecilia reticulata) in high-predation localities show more cohesive shoaling behaviour than those living with less dangerous predators in low-predation sites. We evaluated the relative contributions of population origin (i.e. genetic and/or maternal effects) and social environment on the expression of shoaling by assessing the behaviour of juveniles reared in a range of social conditions. Focal individuals, offspring of guppies from populations from high- or low-predation localities, were reared in a multifactorial experiment; we created four different social conditions by manipulating the source and demography of the conspecific residents with whom focal individuals interacted. We found that high-predation fish displayed a stronger propensity to shoal than low-predation ones. Our results also suggest a role for interactions between the source of the focal individuals, the demography of the group in which they were reared and the origin of the guppies with whom they were reared. Depending on their origin (high- vs. low- predation) and rearing density, our focal fish were more likely to shoal if they were reared with high-predation residents. Learning from high-predation residents, aggressive interactions with low-predation residents and/or phenotype matching could have played a role in driving this effect of social environment. This effect of the phenotype of conspecifics on shoaling development would enhance heritable differences in shoaling propensity such that both could contribute to the well-documented difference in shoaling behaviour of high- and low-predation guppies in natural populations.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".