Does post-ejaculatory sperm experience prior to fertilization alter embryo performance beyond paternity in an external fertilizing fish?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Beyond direct genetic inheritance, parents can influence the phenotype of their offspring by other means. Those based on experiences of the mother (maternal effect) and the father (paternal effect) prior to mating are well documented. Additionally, recent research has suggested that the environment encountered by sperm post-ejaculation might impact offspring development beyond the transfer of the paternal genome. However, the underlying mechanisms are generally not clear, and available literature presents conflicting perspectives on whether such effects are adaptive (anticipatory paternal effect) or maladaptive. Capelin (Mallotus villosus) sperm and embryos are sensitive to salinity and might represent a good system in which to investigate these discrepancies. We used a split-ejaculate and split-brood experimental block design to expose capelin sperm to known benign (25 psu) and stressful (35 psu) salinity prior to egg contact, and we split each batch of fertilized eggs for incubation at matched and mismatched salinity to those of sperm exposure. Our findings revealed no differences in hatch characteristics between embryos produced by sperm exposed to benign and stressful salinity conditions. A follow-up experiment found the same result with an increased selection gradient consisting of 5 and 35 psu. Our study does not support the hypothesis that sperm experiences exert an influence on the development of offspring characteristics.
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) | 0.002 | 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".