Alternative reproductive tactics, an overlooked source of life history variation in the invasive round goby
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alternative reproductive tactics (ARTs) can generate considerable within-species life history variation but are often overlooked. Here, we use the invasive round goby (Neogobius melanostomus) to address a number of ecological and evolutionary questions about ARTs. Making use of a 12-year, multisite Laurentian Great Lakes data set, we show that the guarder male tactic was twice as common as the sneaker male tactic but that nonreproductive males were the most common morph. The ratio of guarder to sneaker males did not vary spatially despite a wide range of resource densities across sites. Guarders and sneakers spanned similar age ranges, suggesting that the ARTs are nonsequentially expressed. Based on short-term (gut contents) diet analyses, both reproductive tactics consumed fewer types of food and tended to consume fewer items overall when compared with nonreproductive males. Long-term (isotope) diet analyses showed that guarder males fed at a higher trophic level (higher δ15N) and had a broader isotopic niche. Our results show that ARTs are an important aspect of this invasive species’ breeding system and should be accounted for when assessing and managing 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".