Background predation risk induces anxiety-like behaviour and predator neophobia in zebrafish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prey face a major challenge in balancing predator avoidance with other essential activities. In environments with high risk, prey may exhibit neophobia (fear of novelty) due to the increased likelihood of novel stimuli being dangerous. The zebrafish, Danio rerio, is an established model organism for many scientific studies. Although spatial and object neophobia in zebrafish have received previous attention, little is known about the role of background risk in inducing neophobia in zebrafish. Here, we present two experiments using zebrafish to explore whether background predation risk can induce anxiety-like behaviour in a novel environment and neophobic responses when exposed to a novel odour. Over five days, we repeatedly exposed zebrafish to either high background risk in the form of chemical alarm cues (i.e., injured conspecific cues that indicate a predator attack) or a low-risk water control stimulus. In Experiment 1, when tested in a novel tank, zebrafish exposed to high predation risk displayed anxiety-like responses (reduced activity and increased bottom time spent) compared to their low-risk counterparts. Moreover, high-risk individuals showed reduced intra-session habituation to the novel tank compared to low-risk individuals. In Experiment 2, high-risk individuals exhibited fear responses toward a novel odour, unlike low-risk individuals. These results reveal that short-term repeated exposures to high risk can induce anxiety-like behaviour and predator odour neophobia in zebrafish.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".