The effects of sex and reproductive condition on auditory evoked responses in the round goby, <i>Neogobius melanostomus</i>.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effectively receiving and responding to mating signals is critically important in acoustically communicating vertebrate species, particularly for individuals that are reproductively mature. Behavioral responses to mating and advertisement signals in these individuals are often more intense than in their non-reproductive counterparts, which might be explained in part by changes in the response properties of the auditory system. The current study examined the potential for auditory plasticity of hearing sensitivity in relation to reproductive state in the round goby. This fish breeds in high density aggregations, with males guarding nests and producing low frequency (150–180 Hz dominant frequency) vocalizations that both males and females can localize. Auditory sensitivities in both sexes were assessed in reproductive and non-reproductive individuals using auditory evoked responses to tone pips that ranged from 100 to 600 Hz. Females were more sensitive than males across their hearing range. When assessed based on reproductive status, reproductive females were more sensitive than non-reproductive females and males at 100 Hz. Thresholds in males were similar between reproductive and non-reproductive individuals. These results suggest that hearing sensitivity in the round goby is sexually dimorphic at selected frequencies and is enhanced with reproductive maturity in females. [Work supported by NSERC.]
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".