Hormonally derived sex pheromones in fish: exogenous cues and signals from gonad to brain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Living in a medium that can limit visual information but readily exposes the olfactory organ to hormonal compounds released by conspecifics, fish throughout their long evolutionary history have had both clear cause and ample opportunity to evolve olfactory responsiveness to these potentially important chemical cues (hormonal pheromones). Indeed, water-borne steroids, prostaglandins, and their metabolites are detected with great sensitivity and specificity by the olfactory organs of diverse fishes, and exert important effects on reproductive behavior and physiology in major taxa including carps (goldfish), catfishes, salmon, and gobies. Best understood are goldfish, where periovulatory females sequentially release a preovulatory steroid pheromone and a postovulatory prostaglandin pheromone that dramatically affect male behavior, physiology, and reproductive fitness. Although the diverse array of hormonal products released and detected by fish indicates clear potential for species-specific hormonal pheromones, olfactory recordings showing similar patterns of hormone detection among closely related species provide little evidence of selection for specificity. By demonstrating that the actions of sex hormones and related products are not limited to reproductive synchrony within the individual, the relatively recent discovery of hormonal pheromones has considerably expanded our understanding of fish reproductive function, while providing valuable model systems for future study of olfactory function and pheromone evolution.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".