MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

THE ECOLOGY OF ASYMMETRY IN STICKLEBACK DEFENSE STRUCTURES

2008· article· en· W2021581439 on OpenAlexaff
T. E. Reimchen, Carolyn Bergstrom

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMorphological variations and asymmetry
Canadian institutionsBamfield Marine Sciences CentreUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSticklebackLimnetic zoneFluctuating asymmetryBiologyGasterosteusPredationEcologyLittoral zoneAsymmetryPopulationFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Slight departures from bilateral symmetry are usually associated with reduced fitness. Here we show that an insular freshwater population of Gasterosteus aculeatus exhibits spatial and temporal segregation according to the incidence and direction of asymmetry in the number of bony lateral plates, which are important predator-defense structures. We analyzed 11,263 fish collected from 19 full lake transects over three years, and found that signed asymmetries for plate number were slightly left-side biased. Asymmetries occurred in 55% of the stickleback with more asymmetrics found during cold weather, and more left-biased individuals found during windy conditions, possibly due to environmentally driven activity levels that differ among asymmetric forms. Absolute plate asymmetries were randomly distributed in the lake, but there was a strong shift in signed plate asymmetry from a mean of zero in littoral zones to left-side bias in limnetic zones, probably due to microhabitat choices among asymmetric forms. Video data of avian piscivores on the lake show laterality in prey handling, providing a potential mechanism for asymmetric prey morphology. Our results imply a complex relationship between slight asymmetries and niche space that is relevant to the broader literature on the evolutionary implications of developmental instability and intrapopulation variability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionSame topicMorphological variations and asymmetryFrench-language works237,207