Response to conspecific and heterospecific alarm cues by pumpkinseeds in simple and complex habitats: field verification of an ontogenetic shift
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three focal size classes [small (<40 mm, standard length, LS), medium (40–80 mm LS) and large (>80 mm LS)] of pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus were exposed to conspecific or one of three heterospecific chemical alarm cues under one of three levels of habitat complexity (low, intermediate and high). Under low and intermediate habitat complexities, pumpkinseeds <80 mm LS exhibited a significant antipredator response when exposed to the chemical alarm cues of heterospecific prey guild members (largemouth bass Micropterus salmonides and hypoxanthine‐3‐N‐oxide, the putative Ostariophysan alarm ‘pheromone’), while pumpkinseeds >80 mm LS exhibited a foraging response. Under highly complex habitats, pumpkinseeds of all three size classes exhibited an antipredator response. Moreover, under all three habitat conditions, pumpkinseeds of all size classes exhibited an antipredator response to conspecific alarm cues. There was no change in behaviour under any treatment combination in response to an allopatric heterospecific control (swordtails Xiphophorus helleri). These results provide the first field verification of the size dependent use of chemical alarm cues by centrarchids and demonstrate that microhabitat complexity significantly influences the threat‐sensitive use of these cues.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".