Chemical cues and pheromones in the sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chemical cues and pheromones guide decisions in organisms throughout the animal kingdom. The neurobiology, function, and evolution of olfaction are particularly well described in insects, and resulting concepts have driven novel approaches to pest control. However, aside from several exceptions, the olfactory biology of vertebrates remains poorly understood. One exception is the sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus), which relies heavily upon olfaction during reproduction. Here, we provide a broad review of the chemical cues and pheromones used by the sea lamprey during reproduction, including overviews of the sea lamprey olfactory system, chemical cues and pheromones, and potential applications to population management. The critical role of olfaction in mediating the sea lamprey life cycle is evident by a well-developed olfactory system. Sea lamprey use chemical cues and pheromones to identify productive spawning habitat, coordinate spawning behaviors, and avoid risk. Manipulation of olfactory biology offers opportunities for management of populations in the Laurentian Great Lakes, where the sea lamprey is a destructive invader. We suggest that the sea lamprey is a broadly useful organism with which to study vertebrate olfaction because of its simple but well-developed olfactory organ, the dominant role of olfaction in guiding behaviors during reproduction, and the direct implications for vertebrate pest management.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".