Sound localization and auditory response capabilities in round goby (<i>Neogobius melanostomus</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A fundamental role in vertebrate auditory systems is determining the direction of a sound source. While fish show directional responses to sound, sound localization remains in dispute. The species used in the current study, Neogobius melanostomus (round goby) uses sound in reproductive contexts, with both male and female gobies showing directed movement towards a calling male. The two-choice laboratory experiment was used (active versus quiet speaker) to analyze behavior of gobies in response to sound stimuli. When conspecific male spawning sounds were played, gobies moved in a direct path to the active speaker, suggesting true localization to sound. Of the animals that responded to conspecific sounds, 85% of the females and 66% of the males moved directly to the sound source. Auditory playback of natural and synthetic sounds showed differential behavioral specificity. Of gobies that responded, 89% were attracted to the speaker playing Padogobius martensii sounds, 87% to 100 Hz tone, 62% to white noise, and 56% to Gobius niger sounds. Swimming speed, as well as mean path angle to the speaker, will be presented during the presentation. Results suggest a strong localization of the round goby to a sound source, with some differential sound specificity.
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 | 0.001 | 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".