MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1874987441 · doi:10.21083/surg.v4i1.1114

An epibiont mediated increase in the susceptibility of Mytilus edulis to predation by Nucella lapillus

2010· article· en· W1874987441 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jess Johansson

Bibliographic record

VenueSURG Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpibiontNucellaBarnacleBiologyMytilusPredationIntertidal zoneEcologyPredatorZoologyIntraspecific competitionCrustacean

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In marine organisms, the relationship that arises between two individuals where one organism biofouls the surface of a typically larger host organism is defined as epibiosis. Colonization of an organism by an epibiont can severely limit the feeding and reproductive abilities of the host and reduce overall fitness. Therefore, it is important to consider the benefits, if any, that the basibiont gains from this epibiotic relationship. In previous experiments, it was observed that barnacle epibionts protected Mytilus edulis from predation by Carcinus maenas, an intertidal predator. This study uses a choice experiment to deduce whether Semibalanus balanoides can mediate predation by another intertidal predator, the dogwhelk Nucella lapillus. N. lapillus preferred the substrate of barnacle-covered mussels to smooth-surface mussels, however specific preference to predate on these mussels was inconclusive from the results. The presence of S. balanoides on the shell surface of M. edulis decreased defensive behaviors, suggesting that the basibiont may be more vulnerable to predation because of this epibiotic relationship. If so, the relationship may border on parasitism if M. edulis fitness is significantly reduced.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.216
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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSURG JournalSame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207