The influence of light colour on the behaviour of Atlantic cod in an experimental setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fishing technologies often exploit the visual sensitivity of target species to alter their behaviours. Atlantic cod ( Gadus morhua Linnaeus, 1758) are an economically important species, commonly targeted by fisheries in the North Atlantic, yet the behaviour of adult Atlantic cod in reaction to the simultaneous presentation of various light stimuli has not been assessed in an isolated setting to determine if there is a preference for certain light qualities. To assess the influence that artificial light may have on the behaviour of Atlantic cod, we investigated the movement of wild-caught cod in a laboratory setting with green, blue, and white light with a blank control presented in paired choice tests. We predicted that green light would have the greatest influence on cod behaviour and that they would preferentially spend more time in proximity to that light condition. The findings show that cod behaved consistently across trials and across experimental sessions, and that the right side of the arena was preferred regardless of the colours of light presented. These findings indicate that cod do not prefer to spend more time in proximity to certain colours of light in an artificial environment, which has direct implications for animal husbandry, fisheries research, and behavioural ecology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".