Sensitivity of northern redbelly dace, <i>Phoxinus eos</i>, to chemical alarm cues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The northern redbelly dace, Phoxinus eos (Cope, 1862), is subject to predation by brook trout, Salvelinus fontinalis (Mitchill, 1814), in Canadian Shield lakes, particularly when individuals migrate to the pelagic zone at sunset to feed on zooplankton and fish shoals break up into single individuals. The objectives of the present study were to (i) determine whether northern redbelly dace react to skin extracts from conspecifics and thus potentially use chemical alarms to detect predators in nature, (ii) characterize the fright reaction in northern redbelly dace under different concentrations of alarm substance, and (iii) estimate the active space of the alarm substance in this species. Northern redbelly dace responded to skin extracts of conspecifics with a series of antipredator behaviours. The dace moved closer to the substrate and away from the area where the alarm substance was injected, increased both the cohesion and polarization of their schools, and performed more dashing and freezing behaviours. The observed responses were closely correlated with the concentration of the skin extract solution, suggesting that individuals could use this sensitivity to different concentrations of alarm substance to estimate the risk of predation in nature. The dilution experiment allowed us to estimate that 1 cm2 of northern redbelly dace skin contains enough alarm substance to generate a response of individuals in 110 558 L of water, which corresponds to a cube with sides of approximately 4.8 m. Indirect evidence suggests that the northern redbelly dace could use chemical alarm cues to assess the risk of predation by brook trout 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".