MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150054220 · doi:10.1242/jeb.084962

The effects of elevated temperature on the sexual traits, immunology and survivorship of a tropical ectotherm

2013· article· en· W2150054220 on OpenAlexaff
Ross D. Breckels, Bryan D. Neff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyEctothermSpermPoeciliaEcologyReproductive successSurvivorship curvePopulationOffspringZoologyBroodGlobal warmingClimate changeDemographyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projected an average global air temperature increase of 1.1-6.4°C by the end of the 21st century. Although the tropics are predicted to experience less extreme temperature increases than regions of higher latitude, tropical ectotherms live close to their thermal limits, and are thus particularly vulnerable to increases in temperature. In this study, we examined how predicted patterns of global warming will affect survival and sexual traits in the Trinidadian guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Guppies were exposed from birth to one of four temperature treatments: 23, 25 (control), 28 or 30°C. We measured brood survival and, at sexual maturity, male ornamentation, sperm traits and immune response. Our results show that increases in temperature result in guppies that have shorter, slower sperm but that there is an optimum temperature for ornamental hue at 28°C. Given the importance of sperm quality for reproduction, these results suggest population viability could be affected by warming. However, we found no difference in brood survival or immune response to a novel antigen across the treatments, indicating that survival may not be as vulnerable as previously thought. Overall, our data suggest that male sexual traits, and in particular sperm performance, are more sensitive than survival to a warming environment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations83
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BiologySame topicPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsFrench-language works237,207