Morphological integration and developmental progress during fish ontogeny in two contrasting habitats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Morphological integration can respond to environmental conditions, a response that may be dynamic through ontogeny. Among fishes, brook charrs (Salvelinus fontinalis) display a trophic polymorphism that makes it a good species for analyzing the ontogeny of morphological integration. To better understand the processes regulating variation and integration, we assess the ontogenetic dynamics of covariances and developmental progress for populations of S. fontinalis from two habitats that differ in water velocity; lake and stream. Geometric morphometrics and developmental progress were evaluated on 751 and 198 specimens, respectively. In both habitats, most ossification events occur before the transition from alevin to juvenile. This threshold defines two distinct periods. During the first period representing free-embryos and alevins, there are important shape changes and rapid ossification, integration tends to be relatively low and decreasing and the variance of shape drastically decreases. During the juvenile period, the rate of shape change decreases and the onset of ossification is nearly complete, plus integration increases and shape variance stabilizes. While we find two distinct developmental periods, we nonetheless find a notable stability underlying the ontogenetic dynamics of variability as well as gradual change in the structure of covariation within each habitat. Our results imply that the variability of juvenile body shape does not seem to retain signals of variability determined early in ontogeny and warrants caution in using juvenile as guides to the earlier causes of variability. Overall, this study highlights the difficulty of inferring causes of integration from studies of static covariance.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".