Variations in the electrocommunication behaviour of the weakly electric fish Apteronotus Leptorhynchus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Apteronotus leptorhynchus (Gymnotiformes) is a weakly electric fish which produces wave-like electric organ discharges as well as brief modulations in the frequency of these discharges, termed chirps. Thought to be used for communicating, this study explores variations in previously described chirp types by investigating fish chirping behaviour through recordings of external electric field modulations, and several novel phenomena were characterized. An alternative form of the type 1 chirp was discovered that is preceded by a gradual rise in frequency lasting 8-10 ms. Two sub-categories of type 2 chirps emerged, distinguished by frequency excursions of 23-86 Hz and 86-183 Hz respectively, and individual fish chirp almost exclusively within a single subgroup. Type 3 chirps occupied a much lower range of durations (10-60 ms) than those previously described, and no type 4, 5 or 6 chirps were observed. Finally, a single unusual chirp characterized by an extreme frequency and amplitude modulation raises interesting questions about chirp production mechanisms. While we cannot exclude that the differences observed across chirping studies are a consequence of subtle differences in methodology, we propose that geographical variation in electrocommunication behaviour should be investigated as an alternative explanation with possible implications for speciation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".