MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The role of prey size and abundance in the geographical distribution of spider sociality

2007· article· en· W1970068726 on OpenAlexaff
Kimberly S. Powers, Leticia Avilés

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Ecology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersPontificia Universidad Católica del EcuadorAmerican Arachnological SocietyUniversity of ArizonaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologySocialityEcologyBiological dispersalSpiderHabitatBiomass (ecology)Abundance (ecology)PredationInsectTheridiidaeRainforestPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1. Social species in the spider genus Anelosimus predominate in lowland tropical rainforests, while congeneric subsocial species occur at higher elevations or higher latitudes. 2. We conducted a comparative study to determine whether differences in total biomass, insect size or both have been responsible for this pattern. 3. We found that larger average insect size, rather than greater overall biomass per se, is a key characteristic of lowland tropical habitats correlating with greater sociality. 4. Social species occupied environments with insects several times larger than the spiders, while subsocial species nearing dispersal occupied environments with smaller insects in either high or low overall biomass. 5. Similarly, in subsocial spider colonies, individuals lived communally at a time when they were younger and therefore smaller than the average insect landing on their webs. 6. We thus suggest that the availability of large insects may be a critical factor restricting social species to their lowland tropical habitats.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations77
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal EcologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207