Zero-shot vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly used as training-free species recognizers, but reported accuracy can reflect more than visual species knowledge. We audit CLIP, BioCLIP, BioCLIP2, and a multilingual Jina CLIP v2 control on seven freshwater-fish categories from two Bangladeshi sources (10,321 images). BioCLIP2 reaches 72.36% on BFF-15 with English common names and 68.91% on SylFishBD with scientific names, versus 25.15% and 14.40% for generic CLIP. BioCLIP2 Bengali prompts are near chance in balanced accuracy (14.22-14.29%); Jina partially recovers Bengali discrimination to 21.89% and 16.36%, but bare Bengali names return to 14.29% on both sources. Paired SylFishBD interventions show no significant weak-blur effect, modest losses from stronger blur/gray masking, a larger white-mask artifact, and strong species dependence. Zero-shot biological VLM scores therefore jointly reflect biological specialization, multilingual alignment, nomenclature, prompt formulation, and context.
Large Language Models (LLMs) perform differently on identical programming tasks when prompted in different natural languages, a phenomenon known as language bias. While this behavior has been widely studied for general text generation, its impact on code generation quality and programming conventions remains largely unexplored. We investigate how the language used to describe programming tasks affects the source code generated by GPT-4o mini, DeepSeek, and Claude. Our study comprises 460 coding tasks spanning Python (230) and Java (230). We translate and manually curate the original English prompts into Chinese, Hindi, Spanish, and Italian while preserving their technical meaning. We evaluate the generated code using multiple dimensions, including functional correctness through test pass rates, structural quality using established code metrics, issues detected by static analysis tools, and lexical characteristics such as the language used in identifiers and comments. Our results show that (i) English prompts do not consistently produce the best functional correctness or code quality, (ii) the impact of prompt language depends on both the programming language and the LLM, and (iii) generated code frequently mixes English with the prompt language in comments and string literals. These findings provide the first curated multilingual benchmark for studying language bias in code generation and offer insights for developing more robust multilingual code generation systems.