MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2051362932 · doi:10.1139/z99-240

The effect of time spent in isolation on the response to novel nonsocial stimulation in the angelfish <i>Pterophyllum scalare</i>

2000· article· en· W2051362932 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Luis M. Gómez‐Laplaza, Elfed Morgan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad de Oviedo
KeywordsBiologyStimulus (psychology)JuvenileStimulationZoologyEcologyNeurosciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The response of juvenile angelfish (Pterophyllum scalare) to a sudden mechanical stimulus and to a visual stimulus moving slowly across the front wall of the aquarium was studied in solitary fish after 1 and 4 days in isolation. The sudden application of a mechanical stimulus resulted in an escape response followed by immobility. Fish isolated for 1 day resumed swimming earlier than did those isolated for 4 days, i.e., swimming in the latter fish was suppressed for longer. In contrast, a slowly moving visual stimulus evoked persistent approach behaviour in 4-day-isolated fish throughout its presentation, whereas 1-day-isolated fish approached the stimulus only towards the end of its travel. The increased response to the stimuli as time spent in isolation increased is discussed in terms of a change in priorities between opposing tendencies to reinstate social contact with conspecifics and to evade predation, and indicates how time spent in isolation may influence decision-making by individuals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction→French-language works237,207→