Metabolic rates mirror morphological and behavioral differences in two sand-dwelling coral reef gobies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Morphology, physiology, and behavior are the primary axes of organismal diversification, and phenotypic differentiation among species in any of these dimensions can be indicative of where, when, and why species can occur and coexist. However, nuanced adaptations in superficially similar species can be difficult to pinpoint, especially for mobile animals in highly diverse ecosystems, such as coral reef fishes. In this context, morphology and behavior are often investigated to assess potential differences, but interspecific variation in physiological traits is not frequently considered. Here, we use field surveys, morphometrics, behavioral observations, gut content DNA metabarcoding, and metabolic rate trials to investigate phenotypic differentiation in 2 small sympatric species of sand-dwelling cryptobenthic coral reef fish. We show that the gobies Fusigobius neophytus and Gnatholepis cauerensis co-occur in sandy habitats throughout a coral reef lagoon in French Polynesia. While superficially similar, the 2 species differ in the length of their gastrointestinal tracts, their ingested prey, and their foraging rates. These differences are also reflected in the species’ standard and maximum metabolic rates: G. cauerensis has a longer intestinal tract and ingests more animal prey, has a more active foraging style, and displays markedly higher standard and maximum metabolic rates than F. neophytus. These results indicate clear differences in the functional niches of the 2 species, which are detectable across these 3 major organismal axes. Given the well-documented direct links between metabolic rate and organismal energy expenditure, we suggest that physiological traits may offer a useful additional dimension in the assessment of sympatric species and their functional roles.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".