Increased brain growth in escaped rainbow trout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recent examples of rapid brain size plasticity in response to novel laboratory environments suggest that fish brain size is a flexible trait, allowing growth or shrinkage of brain tissue based on short term needs. Nevertheless, it remains to be seen if plasticity of fish brain size is relevant to natural environmental conditions. Here, using rainbow trout escaped from a farming operation as a natural experiment, we demonstrate that adult fish brain size can change rapidly in response to life in a natural lake environment. Specifically, escaped trout had on average 15% heavier brains relative to body size than captive trout after living for about 7 months in the lake. Because relative brain size of most escaped trout fell above the range of variation seen within the captive trout population, we conclude that increased brain size was achieved by plasticity after escape. Brain morphology analysis showed that the most anterior regions (olfactory bulbs and rest of telencephalon) contributed most to the increase in overall brain size in escaped trout. Relative size of the heart ventricle, another organ which can be subject to plastic changes under variable environmental conditions in fish, did not differ between escaped and captive trout. Massive and selective brain growth under the changed environmental conditions associated with escape from holding pens highlighted the plastic potential of fish brain size and suggests that a shift to increased complexity of life in the wild setting of a lake imposed greatly increased cognitive requirements on escaped trout.
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".