Shape of Single and Multiple Central-Place Territories in a Stream-Dwelling Fish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Territory shape yields important insights into how animals exploit local resources. Territories of stream-dwelling salmonids are typically (1) mapped around a single central-place, (2) described as circular, elliptical or teardrop-shaped, and (3) believed to reflect their exploitation of drifting invertebrate prey. In this study, we tested the current view of territory shape by mapping multiple central-place territories for 50 young-of-the-year Atlantic salmon. Multiple central-place areas were more elongated (eccentricity: median = 1.301, range = 1.043–2.784) than the foraging patterns around each central place (eccentricity: median = 1.135, range = 1.014–1.385). In addition, multiple central-place areas were elongated along the stream length (33 of 50 fish), whereas the foraging areas around each station tended to be elongated along the stream width (32 of 50 fish). These findings may be explained by the way that stream salmonids interact with drifting prey. At each central place, a wider foraging area should provide an increased access to prey drifting downstream. Similarly, by regularly patrolling a large multiple central-place area along the stream axis, a territorial fish may increase its access to drifting prey by excluding competitors from upstream areas. Further studies are needed on the ecological factors that determine territory shape in stream fish and multiple central-place foragers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".