Angling selects against active and stress-resilient phenotypes in rainbow trout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Selection induced by human harvest can lead to different patterns of phenotypic change than selection induced by natural predation and could be a major driving force of evolution of wild populations. The vulnerability of individuals to angling depends on the individual decision to ingest the bait, possibly mediated by their neuroendocrine response towards the associated stimulus. To investigate the mechanisms behind individual vulnerability to angling, we conducted angling experiments in replicated ponds and quantified individual behavioral traits and neuroendocrine stress responsiveness in two salmonid species, rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and brown trout (Salmo trutta). We discovered a phenotypic syndrome in rainbow trout, but not in brown trout, where lower serotonergic and dopaminergic brain activity and cortisol levels (i.e., lower stress responsiveness) in response to a standardized experimental stressor were associated with higher activity, forming a proactive phenotype that showed increased vulnerability to angling. Our results show that angling targets the most stress-resilient and active phenotypes of rainbow trout, supporting the suggestion that fishing-induced phenotypic selection may lead to an increased representation of stress-responsive and low-activity phenotypes in harvested populations.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".