MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ecological mechanisms favouring behavioural diversification in the absence of morphological diversification: a theoretical examination using brook charr (<i>Salvelinus fontinalis</i>)

2006· article· en· W1588082703 on OpenAlexafffund
Derrick de Kerckhove, Robert L. McLaughlin, David L. G. Noakes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Ecology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersInstitute of Materials Research and EngineeringNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSalvelinusFontinalisDiversification (marketing strategy)EcologyBiologyTroutFish <Actinopterygii>Fishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1. Behavioural diversification is thought to be an important initial step in the origin of resource polymorphisms. We developed a model for young brook charr (Salvelinus fontinalis Mitchill) to examine four mechanisms that could generate a U-shaped relationship between growth rate (fitness) and the proportion of time spent moving that would favour alternative foraging tactics in the absence of obvious differences in body size and shape. 2. Recently emerged brook charr of similar size and shape inhabit still-water pools along the sides of streams. Some individuals tend to sit and wait for crustacean prey at the pool substrate near the bank, while others tend to search actively for insect prey at the pool surface away from the bank. 3. The ecological mechanisms modelled were (i) the relationship between the rate of prey capture and the proportion of time spent moving is curvilinear, such that net rate of energy gain is maximized at two different levels of activity; (ii) switching between foraging locations and, hence, tactics involves lost opportunity and travel costs; (iii) switching between prey types and, hence, tactics involves a learning cost; and (iv) foraging success is status-dependent with individuals switching between tactics having a lower status than those specializing at a tactic. 4. Singly, no mechanism predicted the U-shaped relationship between growth rate and the proportion of time spent moving. Together, a U-shaped relationship was obtained, indicating that the behavioural diversification and diversifying selection observed in the field may be a consequence of multiple, subtle mechanisms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal EcologySame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207