Alternative reproductive tactics in goby fishes of the Caspian Sea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Here we report on the reproductive morphology and histology of three Gobiidae species (the Caspian monkey goby, Neogobius pallasi; the Caspian goby, Neogobius caspius; and the round goby, Neogobius melanostomus) from the Iranian coastline of the Caspian Sea. Based on ageing, reproductive histology, and internal and external morphological measures, it appears that all three of these goby species have two types of reproductive males, a large courting, territorial, male type and a small cuckolding parasitic male type, a phenomenon known as alternative reproductive tactics (ART). Although ARTs have been reported previously for one of these species, the round goby, all reports stem from its invasive range; ARTs have never been reported before in any fish species in the Caspian Sea. In all three goby species there was a large, older male type, with a wide head, dark body colouration, and a large investment in accessory glands (AG), an organ important for female attraction and parental care. But there was also a small, light, younger male type, with a narrow head, longer urogenital papilla, and little investment in AGs. The Caspian goby were the largest of the three species, and in this species the smaller, lighter, presumably cuckolding male morph was quite rare (only about 5% of the reproductive male population). In contrast, many of the round goby and monkey goby males were the small, lighter parasitic type, making up nearly half the population of reproductive males (48% and 40%, respectively). Round goby and Caspian goby males had a prominent mesorchial gland, a fibrous sheath of pheromone-releasing connective tissue that attaches the testes to the dorsal body wall, but all the monkey goby specimens examined lacked this structure. Although ARTs are well documented across fish species and appear to be particularly common in gobies, our study provides the first evidence for ARTs in goby fishes from the Caspian Sea.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".