Social context affects tissue-specific copper distribution and behaviour of threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many species exhibit social living which offers ecological advantages such as increased foraging opportunities, more efficient locomotion and reduced predation risk. Additionally, exposure to multiple individuals of the same species can decrease an individual’s stress and metabolic demand, termed social buffering. If disruption to an animal’s social structure occurs and prevents social buffering, an elevated metabolic rate and thus ventilation frequency and gill permeability are likely. A potential consequence of this physiological response could be the increased accumulation of toxicants. The objective of this study was to investigate whether inducing social stress in marine threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) through social isolation during a sublethal water-borne copper (Cu) exposure would affect Cu uptake and whether that would translate to differences in behaviour and biochemical functioning that is susceptible to Cu. We hypothesized that isolating threespine stickleback during a Cu exposure would increase Cu uptake and sublethal effects compared to a grouped exposure. Wild-caught fish were exposed to control, low Cu or high Cu conditions (0 – 150 µg/L of Cu, nominally), either in isolation or in groups of six for 96 h. Isolated sticklebacks travelled three times less distance, took six times longer to consume food and exhibited moderately increased gill sodium-potassium ATPase activity than group exposed fish, with no effect of Cu. Isolated stickleback also demonstrated significantly higher Cu levels in their gill and liver tissue compared to the group exposed fish. However, this Cu distribution was also present within the control fish which had not been exposed to Cu, suggesting that the social context affects endogenous Cu distribution under stressful conditions. Our results illustrate the differences in physiology and behaviour that can arise when social contexts are manipulated and stress the importance of considering sociality when conducting toxicity tests with social organisms.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".