Cannibalism, competition, and costly care in the plainfin midshipman fish,<i>Porichthys notatus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Caring for offspring is energetically expensive, and when the costs of care are sufficiently high, the use of cost-reducing strategies can be favored. Such strategies may include the avoidance of nest construction through nest take-over and the restoration of depleted energy reserves through offspring cannibalism. Despite extensive theoretical and empirical work on parental care, neither the actual energetic costs of care nor the putative benefits of cost-reducing strategies have been systematically measured. Using plainfin midshipman fish, Porichthys notatus, we assessed how energy reserves of caring parents varied with duration of care, offspring cannibalism, and nest take-overs. We show that liver glycogen and lipid contents declined by 58% and 18.7%, respectively, that liver investment (measured via a hepatosomatic index) declined by 32.6%, and that muscle protein content declined by 8.8%. Other measures of body condition and energy reserves, such as hepatic glucose and adenosine triphosphate, remained stable over the extraordinarily long care period (3 months). Experimentally starved fish showed depletions of energy stores similar to caring fish. Fish that took over nests or that cannibalized eggs both had higher glycogen reserves than fish that did not adopt these strategies. These findings show that even when parental care is energetically costly, starvation may not be the dominant driving factor behind parent–offspring cannibalism.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".