Induced triploidy reduces mercury bioaccumulation in a piscivorous fish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We compared mercury bioaccumulation in triploid and diploid walleye (Sander vitreus) in Narraguinnep Reservoir, Colorado, USA, and made several hypotheses that sex- and ploidy-specific differences in the allocation of energy towards reproductive development would affect mercury bioaccumulation. We tested our hypotheses with linear regression and a bioenergetics model informed by field data. We found diploid walleye had 28%–31% higher mercury concentrations on average than triploids, but there were no differences between sexes of the same ploidy. Triploids of mature age exhibited minimal gonadal development when compared to diploids. After accounting for reproductive investment, the bioenergetics model accounted for most of the observed difference in average mercury concentration between ploidies for females. Conversely, the energetic cost of producing testes was low, and gonadal development could not explain observed patterns for males. Costs associated with elevated swimming activity and metabolism by diploid males relative to other groups could explain the difference but requires further investigation. The use of triploid fish in stocking programs could prove useful for reducing mercury in fish destined for human consumption.
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".