Olfactory responses to steroids in an African mouth‐brooding cichlid, <i>Haplochromis burtoni</i>(Günther)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Underwater electro‐olfactogram (EOG) recordings involving 150 steroids and eight prostaglandins were used to determine which of these potential odorants are detected by the olfactory organ of an African cichlid, Haplochromis burtoni. In initial EOG tests at 10−9 M, H. burtoni did not respond to unconjugated steroids or prostaglandins, but did respond to 17 conjugated steroids, 11 of which (17β‐oestradiol‐17β‐glucuronide; 17β‐oestradiol‐3‐sulphate; 17β‐oestradiol‐3,17β‐disulphate; epiandrosteron‐3β‐sulphate; etiocholanolone‐3α‐glucuronide; testosterone‐17β‐sulphate; dehydroepiandrosterone‐3β‐sulphate; 5α‐pregnan‐3β‐ol‐20‐one‐3β‐sulphate; 5β‐pregnan‐3α,17‐diol‐20‐one‐3α‐glucuronide; 5β‐pregnan‐3α,17,21‐triol‐11,20‐dione‐3α‐glucuronide; pregnenolone‐3β‐sulphate) were selected for EOG concentration‐response, cross‐adaptation and binary mixture tests. The EOG detection thresholds ranged from 10−11 to 10−9 M in all but one instance (female threshold to pregnenolone‐3β‐sulphate; 10−8 M), and males and females exhibited only minor differences in EOG threshold or response magnitude. Results of EOG cross‐adaptation tests, which were supported by results of binary mixture tests, indicated that the response to the 11 steroid conjugates is mediated by five putative olfactory receptor mechanisms characterized by specificity for conjugate position and type: 3‐sulphate, 17‐sulphate, 3,17‐disulphate, 3‐glucuronide, 17‐glucuronide. Although there is no evidence that H. burtoni releases, or exhibits biological response to, the steroids shown to be detected in this study, the present results are suggestive of a complex pheromone system utilizing steroid conjugates.
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".