Conspecific familiarity and shoaling preferences in a wild guppy population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In nature, social groups of animals are typically nonrandom associations of individuals. Such group associations may in part be based on social familiarity among individuals, acquired through repeated past encounters and behavioural experiences with each other. The factors that potentially affect the tendency to associate with familiar individuals remain poorly understood. Here, we investigated whether shoaling preferences based on presumed familiarity occur in wild adult guppies (Poecilia reticulata) originating from a Trinidadian population that experiences relatively low predation intensity from fishes and whether any such preferences differ between the sexes. When tested shortly after being collected in the field, neither males nor females clearly preferred to shoal with familiar same-sex conspecifics (collected from the same pool in the river) over unfamiliar ones (from different pools). Importantly, our results differ from those previously reported for guppies originating from the same population as ours and for a high predation risk population in Trinidad, suggesting that the development of social familiarity and its role in the formation of shoals in nature vary both within and among populations in the guppy. We provide plausible explanations for these observed populational differences in shoaling preferences in the guppy and discuss certain ecological factors that may affect the development and expression of shoaling preferences based on familiarity in nature.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".