Population, sex, and ontogenetic differences in the procurrent rays of the caudal fin in threespine sticklebacks (<i>Gasterosteus</i><i>aculeatus</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The procurrent rays occur at the leading edge of the caudal fin in bony fishes and are taxonomically variable and possibly important to caudal motion. Using radiographs, as well as stained and cleared specimens, of threespine sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus L., 1758) from lakes on Haida Gwaii, British Columbia, we examined the extent of individual and population variabilities in these rays. Among 1113 fish from Drizzle Lake, 53% of individuals were dorsoventrally asymmetric in number of rays of which 95% had greater number of rays on the dorsal lobe. On 274 fish, we also quantified dorsal to ventral (D/V) ratios of the width of the most posterior procurrent rays and found ontogenetic shifts with symmetrical D/V ratios in subadults shifting to significant dorsal biases on the larger fish (60–90 mm standard length (SL)). Males have proportionally greater dorsal bias than females of equivalent size in both number and width of procurrent rays. We examined D/V width ratios in 105 stained and cleared specimens from 13 additional allopatric lake populations on Haida Gwaii. Eight populations were symmetrical for width of dorsal and ventral rays, while three populations were ventrally biased and two populations were dorsally biased. D/V ratios were best predicted by positive associations with adult body size and negative associations with total number of gill rakers.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".