Strain-specific alteration of zebrafish feeding behavior in response to aversive stimuli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Behavioral management of risk, in which organisms must balance the requirements of obtaining food resources with the risk of predation, has been of considerable interest to ethologists for many years. Although numerous experiments have shown that animals alter their foraging behavior depending on the levels of perceived risk and demand for nutrients, few have considered the role of genetic variation in the trade-off between these variables. We performed a study of four zebrafish (Danio rerio (Hamilton, 1822)) strains to test for genetic variation in foraging behavior and whether this variation affected their response to both aversive stimuli and nutrient restriction. Zebrafish strains differed significantly in their latency to begin foraging from the surface of the water under standard laboratory conditions. Fish fed sooner when nutrients were restricted, although this was only significant in the absence of aversive stimuli. Aversive stimuli caused fish to delay feeding in a strain-specific manner. Strains varied in food intake and specific growth rate, and feeding latency was significantly correlated with food intake. Our results indicate significant genetic variation in foraging behavior and the perception of risk in zebrafish, with a pattern of strain variation consistent with behavioral adaptation to captivity.
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".