Altered Prey Responses in Round Goby from Contaminated Sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although prey must move to forage, escape predation or gain information about predation risk, movement itself enhances the risk of predation by increasing visibility of prey and encounter rates with predators. Animals subjected to stressors often show altered behaviour; a widely cited effect of contaminant exposure is an increase in vulnerability to predation, which may be mediated by an increase in risky behaviour. Round goby are invasive fish that typically rely on crypsis and sheltering (low‐activity behaviours) to avoid predators. We collected round goby from contaminated sites and tested whether they showed signs of altered risk‐taking compared with fish from a less contaminated reference site. We subjected the fish to a simulated predation event (a motor‐operated model bass) under both diurnal and nocturnal conditions. Fish from contaminated sites showed lower overall activity levels, but also failed to reduce activity following an attack, unlike fish from the reference site. The intensity of effects varied with diel period. Males, but not females, from contaminated sites showed reduced likelihood of darting during an attack, while females, but not males, from contaminated sites were less likely to approach the predator. Sex differences in round goby risk‐taking may reflect sex‐specific selection pressures on activities promoting predation risk. With the exception of post‐attack activity, round goby from contaminated sites generally showed signs of reduced risk‐taking. If contaminant exposure increases goby vulnerability to predators, it may be occurring through behavioural mechanisms other than impacts on risky prey responses.
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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".