Light induced changes in starry flounder ( <i>Platichthys stellatus</i> ) opsin expression and its influence on vision estimated from a camouflage-based behavioural assay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Correlations between variation in opsin expression and variation in vision are often assumed but rarely tested. We exposed starry flounder ( Platichthys stellatus ) to either broad spectrum sunlight or green-filtered light in outdoor aquaria for seven weeks and then combined digital-PCR and camouflage experiments to test two hypotheses: i) short-wavelength sensitive opsin expression decreases in a green light environment, and ii) if observed, this change in opsin expression influences colour vision as estimated using a camouflage-based behavioural assay. Of the eight visual opsins measured, Sws1 (UV sensitive) and Sws2B (blue sensitive) expression was significantly lower in fish exposed to green light. However, opsin expression in fish transferred to an arena illuminated with white LED light for three hours after the green light treatment did not differ from broad spectrum controls. Changes in opsin expression in response to artificial light environments have been reported before, but rapid changes over three hours rather than days or weeks is unprecedented. We did not observe a significant difference in a flounder’s camouflage response based on light environment, although broad spectrum fish increased and green-filter fish decreased the pattern contrast when on the blue-green substrate, and this difference approached significance. This pattern is intriguing considering green-filter fish expressed fewer UV and blue opsins and we recommend increased statistical power for future experiments. Together, our results show that starry flounder opsin expression changes rapidly in response to changes in light environment, however, there is no apparent effect on their visually mediated camouflage.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".