Size‐Dependent Consequences of Exogenous Cortisol Manipulation on Overwinter Survival and Condition of Largemouth Bass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little is known about the size-dependent consequences of stressors on wild animals, which is particularly relevant during winter where size-specific trends in survival are common. Here, exogenous cortisol manipulation was used to investigate the effect of a physiological challenge on overwinter mortality and spring condition of largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) across a range of body sizes. Fish were wild-caught in the fall, assigned into either control or cortisol manipulated treatments, and held in replicated experimental ponds. For bass that survived the winter, length, mass, and health metrics (e.g., gonadosomatic index [GSI], hepatosomatic index [HSI], and water content) were determined in the spring. Winter survival was marginally lower for cortisol treated bass; however, there was no influence of initial length, mass, or condition on overwinter survival. When bass were grouped by size, survival was significantly higher for bass 300-350 mm in length compared to those <200 mm. The treatment did not strongly influence spring health metrics, suggesting that largemouth bass that survived the winter were able to recover from the effects of the cortisol elevation. Initial size and sex were linked to some spring health metrics, with large females having the highest GSI and HSI scores. Overall, results from this study do not support the notion that there are size-dependent responses to cortisol manipulation in a teleost fish. Rather, this type of physiological challenge may modulate the natural rates of winter mortality that are primarily driven by starvation and predation, independent of body size, in subadult and adult largemouth bass.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".