Threat-sensitive learning of predator odours by a prey fish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[Many prey animals have a remarkable ability to match the intensity of their behavioural responses to the degree of threat posed by specific predators. However, little is known about how such threat-sensitive predator avoidance develops. In a series of laboratory experiments we tested whether goldfish (Carassius auratus) could learn to recognize predator odours in a threat-sensitive manner. We exposed predator-naive goldfish to various concentrations of chemical cues of pike (Esox lucius) fed goldfish and pike fed another fish diet (swordtails,Xiphophorus helleri). During the conditioning trials goldfish showed behavioural responses to pike fed goldfish but not to pike fed swordtails. Moreover, the intensity of the responses to pike cues increased as the concentration of pike cues increased. Subsequent test trials showed that goldfish that had originally been exposed to pike fed goldfish showed responses to pike fed swordtails, indicating learned recognition of the pike as a predator. Of particular importance, the intensity of the learned responses by the goldfish matched the intensity of the responses observed in the original conditioning trials, thereby demonstrating threat-sensitive learning. Prey should have a selective advantage if they are able to adjust the intensity of their anti-predator response to match the threat posed by their predators. Our preliminary investigations revealed that this threat-sensitive learning has important survival implications during encounters with pike., Many prey animals have a remarkable ability to match the intensity of their behavioural responses to the degree of threat posed by specific predators. However, little is known about how such threat-sensitive predator avoidance develops. In a series of laboratory experiments we tested whether goldfish (Carassius auratus) could learn to recognize predator odours in a threat-sensitive manner. We exposed predator-naive goldfish to various concentrations of chemical cues of pike (Esox lucius) fed goldfish and pike fed another fish diet (swordtails,Xiphophorus helleri). During the conditioning trials goldfish showed behavioural responses to pike fed goldfish but not to pike fed swordtails. Moreover, the intensity of the responses to pike cues increased as the concentration of pike cues increased. Subsequent test trials showed that goldfish that had originally been exposed to pike fed goldfish showed responses to pike fed swordtails, indicating learned recognition of the pike as a predator. Of particular importance, the intensity of the learned responses by the goldfish matched the intensity of the responses observed in the original conditioning trials, thereby demonstrating threat-sensitive learning. Prey should have a selective advantage if they are able to adjust the intensity of their anti-predator response to match the threat posed by their predators. Our preliminary investigations revealed that this threat-sensitive learning has important survival implications during encounters with pike.]
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) | 0.002 | 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".