MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2763818360 · doi:10.1111/eth.12691

Ontogenetic changes in chemical alarm cue recognition and fast‐start performance in guppies (<i>Poecilia reticulata</i>)

2017· article· en· W2763818360 on OpenAlexaff
Jigang Xia, Mei‐Ling Cheng, Ruiyu Cai, Shi‐Jian Fu, Steven J. Cooke, Chris K. Elvidge

Bibliographic record

VenueEthology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPoeciliaOntogenyALARMBiologyReplicatePredationZoologyFish <Actinopterygii>EcologyStatisticsFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Risk recognition and fast‐start performance are critical to fish survival when faced with predators. Many fish species have been shown to recognize risks associated with chemical cues released by injured conspecifics. However, little is known about the ontogeny of “risk” recognition via damage‐released chemical alarm cues and fast‐start performance in prey fishes. The objectives of this study were to determine whether risk recognition and fast‐start performance in guppies ( Poecilia reticulata ) exhibit ontogenetic variation, and whether there is a trade‐off between risk recognition and fast‐start performance. To achieve these objectives, individual guppies from replicate groups were assayed on one of the 1st, 7th, 14th, 21st, or 28th day after their birth. We found that both the risk recognition and fast‐start performance in guppies exhibited ontogenetic variation, as on days 1 and 7, fish did not exhibit risk recognition when exposed to alarm cues from conspecifics, but by day 14, such recognition was evident. Noticeable increases in maximum linear velocity ( V max ), maximum linear acceleration ( A max ), and escape distance ( S 120 ms ) were concurrent with progressive ontogenetic stage, and no significant correlations were found between risk recognition and fast‐start performance at any ontogenetic stage. Our findings reveal ontogenetic variation in damage‐released chemical cue recognition and fast‐start performance in guppies.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.561
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthologySame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207