MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2697459406 · doi:10.1111/1365-2435.12929

Field evidence for a rapid adaptive plastic response in morphology and growth of littoral and pelagic brook charr: A reciprocal transplant experiment

2017· article· en· W2697459406 on OpenAlexafffund
Marc Pépino, Pierre Magnan, Raphaël Proulx

Bibliographic record

VenueFunctional Ecology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsEcotypePelagic zoneLittoral zoneBiologyPhenotypic plasticityEcologyHabitatBenthic zoneSupralittoral zoneIntertidal zone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Phenotypic plasticity, a process by which individuals modify their morphology, physiology, or behaviour in response to environmental changes, can be seen as the first step in adaptive evolution. Phenotypic plasticity is adaptive if two conditions are met: (1) the phenotype is associated with an environment (plastic response) and (2) the phenotype–environment association increases individual fitness (adaptive response). Using a reciprocal transplant experiment, we tested the hypothesis that functional morphological responses are correlated with growth at two organizational levels (between and within ecotypes) in brook charr. Four‐month‐old individuals from four littoral and four pelagic families raised in the laboratory were transferred into eight littoral (3 m × 4 m × 1.5 m depth) and eight pelagic (3 m × 4 m × 6 m depth) lake enclosures for a period of 12 weeks. Fin length (the main discriminant trait of the littoral and pelagic ecotypes) was less plastic than body shape. Growth was higher in the pelagic than in the littoral habitat, but offspring from littoral and pelagic parental origins did not experience higher growth in their respective habitats (comparison between ecotypes). The body shape of most individuals transplanted to their reciprocal environment shifted toward the form expected in that environment. This plastic response in body shape was functionally correlated with growth within ecotypes, but only in the littoral habitat. Furthermore, the within‐ecotype variance of both morphological traits and growth were higher in the littoral than in the pelagic habitat. Small phenotypic differences could have direct consequences on fitness in the less favourable habitat, inducing higher inter‐individual variance in growth and stronger phenotype–growth associations. We suggest that phenotypic accommodation and cryptic genetic variation, two mechanisms previously proposed as mechanisms involved in distinct situations, could be simultaneously involved to hasten the process of adaptive evolution in an unfavourable environment. A plain language summary is available for this article.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFunctional EcologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207