The role of various sensory inputs in establishing social hierarchies in crayfish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crayfish form social hierarchies through agonistic interactions. During formation of social hierarchies, individual crayfish establish dominance by signalling status through olfaction, vision and touch. Our study investigated which of these three sensory modalities played the most important role in establishing dominance in rusty crayfish (Orconectes rusticus). Olfaction, vision and touch were systematically impaired in staged triadic and dyadic agonistic interactions to determine the relative contribution of each sensory input. Our results suggest that olfaction is the most important sensory modality during the initial formation of dominance hierarchies in rusty crayfish. Using olfaction alone, crayfish were capable of communicating social status with sensory competent crayfish; without full olfactory ability crayfish were unable to effectively establish dominance. Vision and touch were also found to play practical roles in reducing unnecessary risk; with antennae for touch, functionally reducing the number of fight initiations, and vision allowing a crayfish under imminent attack to ready itself, strike first, or retreat.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".