Underwater Video Reveals Strong Avoidance of Chemical Alarm Cues by Prey Fishes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A diversity of fishes release chemical cues upon being attacked by a predator. These cues, commonly termed alarm cues, act as sources of public information warning conspecifics of predation risk. Species which are members of the same prey guild (i.e. syntopic and share predators) often respond to one another's alarm cues. The purpose of this study was to discriminate avoidance responses of fishes to conspecific alarm cues and cues of other prey guild members from responses to unknown damaged fish odours and novel odours. We used underwater video to measure avoidance responses of freshwater littoral species, namely fathead minnows ( Pimephales promelas ), finescale dace ( Chrosomus neogaeus ), and brook stickleback ( Culaea inconstans ), to both injured fish cues and novel non‐fish odours. The cyprinids (minnows and dace) showed significant avoidance of minnow cues over swordtail cues, morpholine, and the control of distilled water and tended to avoid fathead cues over cues of known prey guild members (stickleback). Cyprinids also significantly avoided cues of stickleback over unknown heterospecific cues (swordtail) and tended to avoid stickleback cues over morpholine and the distilled water control. Stickleback significantly avoided fathead minnow extract over the distilled water and tended to avoid stickleback and swordtail over distilled water. We conclude that fishes in their natural environment can show dramatic changes in behaviour upon exposure to alarm cues from conspecifics and prey guild members. These responses do not represent avoidance of cues of any injured fish or any novel odour.
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".