Reproductive individuality of clonal fish raised in near-identical environments and its link to early-life behavioral individuality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Recent studies have documented among-individual variation that is unexplained by genetic or apparent environmental differences, but it remains an open question whether such seemingly stochastic variation has fitness consequences. We perform a life-history experiment with naturally clonal fish ( Poecilia formosa ), separated directly after birth into near-identical (i.e., highly standardized) environments, quantifying 2522 offspring from 152 broods over 280 days. We find that (i) individuals differ consistently in the size of offspring and broods produced over consecutive broods, (ii) these differences are observed even when controlling for trade-offs between brood size, offspring size and reproductive onset, indicating individual differences in life-history productivity and (iii) early-life behavioral individuality in activity and feeding patterns, with among-individual differences in feeding being predictive of growth, and consequently offspring size. In this work, we provide experimental evidence that processes unexplained by genetic and apparent environmental differences translate into predictable differences in life-history measures and ultimately fitness.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".