MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Paternal Genetic Effects on Foraging Decision‐Making Under the Risk of Predation

2006· article· en· W2160212437 on OpenAlexafffund
Joanna S. Lister, Bryan D. Neff

Bibliographic record

VenueEthology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsForagingOffspringLepomis macrochirusPredationBiologySireZoologyEcologyLarvaFisheryAnimal scienceGeneticsPregnancyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Foraging behavior under the risk of predation has interested biologists for decades. Here, we examine paternal genetic effects on foraging decisions of bluegill ( Lepomis macrochirus ) larvae sired by males adopting alternative life histories. We use split in vitro fertilization to generate maternal half‐siblings sired by either a ‘parental’ male or a ‘cuckolder’ male. Immediately, upon the switch to exogenous feeding, we fed the larvae ad libitum for 2 d. We then starved the larvae for between 12 and 17 h, following which we subjected them to a dichotomous choice foraging trial, where one side of a test tank posed a risky foraging habitat and the other posed a safe foraging habitat. Equal amounts of food were simultaneously introduced to both sides of the tank and the proportion of individuals on either side was recorded. There were significantly fewer cuckolder offspring foraging on the risky side of the tank when compared with their parental half‐siblings indicating that cuckolder offspring took fewer risks than parental offspring. These results demonstrate a paternal genetic effect (sire life history) on foraging behavior. We ruled out energetic state as a possible explanation for this difference because the half‐siblings did not differ in body length or mass. Instead, previous research suggests that cuckolder offspring have higher conversion efficiency (efficiency of converting food into soma) than parental offspring and therefore the differences in foraging behavior observed here may, in part, be attributed to genetic differences in conversion efficiency.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.648
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthologySame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207