Morphological and life‐history differentiation between littoral and pelagic forms of pumpkinseed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trophically dimorphic pumpkinseed populations were investigated in five lakes in Ontario, Canada to determine: (1) whether the morphological traits that distinguish littoral from pelagic forms are consistent among populations; (2) whether the pharyngeal jaw apparatus is diminished in pelagic pumpkinseeds because of a lower proportion of hard‐bodied prey in their diets; (3) whether there is life‐history differentiation between littoral and pelagic forms. Pumpkinseeds captured from the littoral and pelagic zones differed significantly in morphology in four of the five lakes, but the number of external measures that differed significantly within the differentiated populations ranged from zero to six. Littoral pumpkinseeds generally had longer heads, more rearward placement of dorsal and pectoral fins, longer pectoral fins and deeper bodies than pelagic pumpkinseeds. Littoral and pelagic pumpkinseeds were more readily differentiated by internal morphometric measures, with littoral individuals having larger molars and wider spacing between gill rakers than pelagic individuals. Littoral and pelagic differences in age at maturity, size at maturity and gonado‐somatic index were present only in one of three populations assessed for these traits, suggesting that morphological divergence is not necessarily accompanied by life‐history differentiation.
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".