Back

The evolution of cavefish odor perception shifts fish response from avoidance to approach when exposed to alarm and death odors.

Harkinish-Murray, Z. I.; Chan, T. B.; Gbarlea, J.; Sinha, A.; Bedard, A.; AlGarni, H.; Sukhram, D. T.; Juarez, J. F.; Rodriquez-Morales, R.; Kozol, R. A.

2025-10-03 evolutionary biology
10.1101/2025.10.01.679817 bioRxiv
Show abstract

An organisms survival is dependent on activating the correct behavioral circuit in response to a stimulus. While stimulus perception is largely conserved, we still do not know the evolutionary mechanisms that drive changes in stimulus perception. Therefore, we wondered how odor perception has evolved in cavefish that encounter vastly different odors compared to their surface ancestors. While surface populations show attraction to social odors and avoidance of alarm and death odors, cave populations are sexually dimorphic in their responses to social odors and exhibit attraction to alarm and death odors. Finally, we find that odor perception variation is genetically encoded and plastic, while tissue clearing and brain mapping suggest odor perception is governed by thalamic and hypothalamic circuits. Taken together, we describe a unique model for investigating the environmental, genetic, and neurological mechanisms underlying olfactory evolution in vertebrates.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
● 2444 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
21.5%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Current Biology
○ 665 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
11.7%
Similar papers in this journal
3
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 11%
9.6%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
● 393 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
9.6%
Similar papers in this journal
50% of probability mass above
5
Science Advances
● 1243 papers in training set
Top 2%
7.7%
Similar papers in this journal
6
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.6%
7
Nature Ecology & Evolution
131 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
5.4%
8
Molecular Ecology
○ 336 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.3%
9
BMC Biology
○ 265 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
2.7%
10
Molecular Biology and Evolution
◐ 542 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.3%
11
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 47%
2.1%
12
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 46%
1.7%
13
Evolution
◐ 225 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
14
Communications Biology
○ 993 papers in training set
Top 19%
1.3%
15
Science
● 477 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.1%
16
Ecology Letters
○ 135 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
17
PNAS Nexus
◐ 159 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
18
BMC Ecology and Evolution
○ 51 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
19
Evolution Letters
◐ 85 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
20
Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution
○ 22 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
21
The American Naturalist
● 125 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.