Fertilization dynamics in rainbow trout (<i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i>): effect of male age, social experience, and sperm concentration and motility on in vitro fertilization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examine aspects of the fertilization dynamics of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) that may play a role in determining reproductive success of males of different age and status competing for spawning. There were no differences in the gonadosomatic indices and relative yields of milt of adult (3-year) and precocious (1-year) male rainbow trout collected from a wild population. The concentration of sperm in the milt of precocious males was higher than that of adult males. The duration of sperm motility was similar in the two groups of males and increased over the period of sampling. Interaction of a male with a nesting female caused an increase in milt yield, but did not affect sperm concentration, sperm motility, or fertilization rates. There was a sharp decline in fertilization rate 20 s or more after activation of the sperm or eggs by fresh water. Exposure to milt suspension for as little as 0.5 s resulted in fertilization of <27% of eggs. The short gamete longevity and the speed with which fertilization occurs indicate that the timing and position of sperm release may play a critical role in determining the reproductive success of males in competition for spawning with a single female.
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".