Can chemical cues act as landmarks in the orientation of the cave fish<i>Phreatichthys andruzzii</i>?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the constant darkness of cave environments fish locomotion has to be directed by nonvisual spatial information. Four series of tests were done to determine the ability of the hypogean cyprinid Phreatichthys andruzzii Vinciguerra, 1924 to memorize a synthetic chemical cue (morpholine, C4H9NO), to associate it with an area, to utilize such information for direct locomotory activity, and to determine how long that association is retained in fish memory. Although morpholine acts as neutral stimulus for P. andruzzii, after acclimation in morpholine-scented areas devoid of food resources specimens showed a clear tendency to avoid waters characterized by the odour of that chemical. We hypothesize that an association between odours and trophic characteristics of an area allows the fish to optimize their exploratory activity, as it allows them to recognize areas already experienced to be devoid of trophic resources and to avoid these as unprofitable places. The above association seems to be memorized for a short time; the behavioural response vanishing between 6 and 18 h after the end of the acclimation period. After a certain time has elapsed, it could be profitable to visit the same areas again to verify the incidental availability of new food sources.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".