MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294992668 · doi:10.1111/jeb.14085

Evolutionary divergence in phenotypic plasticity shapes brain size variation between coexisting sunfish ecotypes

2022· article· en· W4294992668 on OpenAlexafffund
Caleb J. Axelrod, Beren W. Robinson, Frédéric Laberge

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Evolutionary Biology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish biology, ecology, and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyForagingPelagic zonePhenotypic plasticityPredationEcologyLepomisLittoral zoneEcotypeBrain size

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mechanisms that generate brain size variation and the consequences of such variation on ecological performance are poorly understood in most natural animal populations. We use a reciprocal-transplant common garden experiment and foraging performance trials to test for brain size plasticity and the functional consequences of brain size variation in Pumpkinseed sunfish (Lepomis gibbosus) ecotypes that have diverged between nearshore littoral and offshore pelagic lake habitats. Different age-classes of wild-caught juveniles from both habitats were exposed for 6 months to treatments that mimicked littoral and pelagic foraging. Plastic responses in oral jaw size suggested that treatments mimicked natural habitat-specific foraging conditions. Plastic brain size responses to foraging manipulations differed between ecotypes, as only pelagic sourced fish showed brain size plasticity. Only pelagic juveniles under 1 year-old expressed this plastic response, suggesting that plastic brain size responses decline with age and so may be irreversible. Finally, larger brain size was associated with enhanced foraging performance on live benthic but not pelagic prey, providing the first experimental evidence of a relationship between brain size and prey-specific foraging performance in fishes. The recent post-glacial origin of these ecotypes suggests that brain size plasticity can rapidly evolve and diverge in fish under contrasting ecological conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Evolutionary BiologySame topicFish biology, ecology, and behaviorFrench-language works237,207