Post-spawning defence by male brook charr is linked to perceived paternity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Salmonine fishes are generally thought not to exhibit male parental care, although brief post-spawning mate-guarding by males is known for a number of species, often for populations where eggs are subjected to intense predation (egg cannibalism). Here, detailed in situ data on the spawning behaviour of male brook charr, Salvelinus fontinalis, from a naturally reproducing lake population is used to test whether post-spawning mate guarding (i.e. paternal care) is related to perceived paternity. From video records of spawning events (n = 20), we documented a novel behaviour whereby the dominant male curtails spawning ahead of the female (by ~ 3 s) and immediately inspects the nest. Afterwards, the dominant male significantly reduces courtship behaviour (quivers) but aggressively defends the female with the same intensity as prior to spawning. The duration of mate guarding (range: 3–48 min), however, declined with increasing numbers of peripheral males that had rushed into the nest at spawning. Neither the number of active females present on the spawning grounds nor male body size influenced the amount of time dominant males spent mate guarding. Extensive revisitation (80% of visits) by males to spawning sites and to females during focal sampling bouts highlights the importance of a male’s ability to predict female readiness to spawn as a significant component of reproductive success. Thus, dominant males appear to guard females at a cost of acquiring other mating opportunities and adjust the time spent guarding depending upon their perceived paternity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".