Different developmental environments reveal multitrait plastic responses in South American Anostomidae fish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Complex phenotypes result from developmental processes integrating genetic, epigenetic, and environmental information. Although changing environments combine several signals that may induce multitrait plastic responses, literature often decodes developmental plasticity into single trait variation as a function of isolated environmental signals. To address the multivariate nature of developmental plasticity, we evaluated how different combinations of environmental signals influence the development of morphological and behavioral traits. We raised Megaleporinus macrocephalus (Anostomidae) in four different developmental environments, and found that foraging position and structural complexity during development induced different morphotypes, which overlapped with behavioral patterns. Foraging position induced distinct patterns of mouth and fin positioning and overall body shape, which were accentuated by structural complexity. Moreover, fish most often chose conditions similar to their developmental environments. Combined signals during development, therefore, revealed environment-specific phenotypic patterns associating morphology and behavior. Such results endorse the ability of developmental processes to influence the variation present in natural populations. Implications of addressing the multivariate essence of developmental plasticity transcend the evolutionary theory and inspire applications in several fields.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".