Tracking the startle response of guppies<i>Poecilia reticulata</i>in three dimensions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A three-dimensional analysis of startle behaviours of guppies Poecilia reticulata, in dyads or alone, from two populations that show distinct differences in shoaling behaviour was performed. During the first few seconds after a startling stimulus, changes in behaviour, which could be critical if an individual is to survive a predatory attack, and the interactions between pairs of P. reticulata were examined. The enhanced social interactions immediately after the stimulus, as a proxy for shoaling behaviour, and their dissipation were quantified. Social (individuals tested in dyads) v. asocial (tested alone) responses to the startling stimulus were also compared. The three-dimensional reconstruction, from a two-camera, high-frame-rate tracking system allowed for the tracking of the individuals' speed and speed recovery and, for P. reticulata in dyads, interindividual distance and orientation. For the dyads from the high-predation population, the closer the individuals were to each other, the more likely they were to be parallel, but no correlation was found for the low-predation P. reticulata. The startle response of P. reticulata comprised the following sequence: freezing, darting and skittering and recovery to pre-stimulus swimming behaviour. Upon repeated encounters with the stimulus, a reduced shoaling and startle response was observed, although the rate of reduction was faster in P. reticulata from the high-predation population than those from the low-predation population. The results are discussed in light of what is known about the anti-predator behaviour of this species.
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".