Personalities in captive amphibians: how do alpine (Ichthyosaura alpestris) and palmate (Lissotriton helveticus) newts adapt their behaviour when maintained ex-situ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amphibians are currently the animal class facing the highest risk of extinction, notably because of disease outbreaks. Faced with the urgency and the complexity of the situation, conservation institutions prioritize the implementation of ex-situ collections to ensure the persistence of the most endangered species. Yet, little is known about the effect of captivity on their skin microbiome, an effective barrier against pathogens responsible for chytridiomycosis in the wild. Moreover, behavioural adaptations to captivity have been reported in several anurans. We hypothesize that captivity could restructure salamander skin microbiota, and could also modify their behaviour, thereby weakening their in-situ fitness during reintroduction efforts. \nUsing two European urodeles, the alpine newt, Ichthyosaura alpestris, and the palmate newt, Lissotriton helveticus, we collected adults in the wild and kept them in captivity for a year, while monitoring the evolution of their behaviour and skin microbiome monthly. Differences in microbiome and behaviour were noted between sexes and species, and between phases (aquatic to terrestrial phase). As our results suggest, newts have different personalities and show differences in the evolution of the skin-microbiome. Taken together, we hope these results will provide general guidelines for in-situ conservation projects for urodeles.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".