Social Context Influences the Antipredator Behaviour of Fathead Minnows to Chemical Alarm Cues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Prey fishes, like many organisms under fluctuating predation threat, rely on multiple sources of information to accurately gauge current risk. This includes the use of chemical cues such as alarm cues from damaged conspecifics or familiar heterospecifics, as well as the odour of known predators. While each fish is well equipped with its own array of sensory abilities, they should also be alert to the behaviours of nearby neighbours who may have information they lack. In the present study, we tested the ability of fathead minnows to use social cues in combination with the odour of damaged conspecifics and heterospecifics to mediate the assessment of predation risk. Specifically, we tested whether the presence of a shoal of conspecifics or familiar heterospecifics would significantly change a minnow's antipredator behaviour when exposed to the odour of a damage‐release cue from a conspecific or ecologically similar heterospecific. The results of our study showed a significant interaction between the damage‐release cues to which the minnows were exposed and the presence/absence of shoalmates. These findings have important implications for the design of future investigations of antipredator responses because most studies of group‐living prey have been conducted on solitary subjects.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".