Peer Review #1 of "Vision of conspecifics decreases the effectiveness of ethanol on zebrafish behaviour (v0.2)"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aquatic organisms in pharmacology and toxicology research are often exposed to compounds in isolation prior to physiological or behavioural testing.Recent evidence suggests that the presence of conspecifics during a stressful event can modulate behavioural outcomes (called 'social buffering') when testing occurs within the same context.It is unknown, however, whether the social environment during exposure interacts with the efficacy of anxiety-altering substances when subsequently tested in the absence of conspecifics.In this study, zebrafish were individually exposed to habitat water or ethanol (1.0% vol/vol) while untreated conspecifics were visually present or absent during dosing.Using the novel object approach test, a validated test of boldness and anxiety-like behaviour, we observed significantly greater effects of ethanol in isolated fish, compared to fish with a view of conspecifics during dosing.These results were not explained by altered locomotion during exposure which might otherwise increase drug uptake.This highlights the need to consider the social environment during exposure when conducting and interpreting behavioural research involving drug or toxicant exposure.
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 | 0.009 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.371 | 0.214 |
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".