Predation by green crab and sand shrimp on settling and recently settled American lobster postlarvae
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Very little is known about predation on early life stages of the American lobster, Homarus americanusMilne Edwards, 1837, including the identity of predators and the threat they represent. In this laboratory experiment, we investigated the predatory threat that green crabs, Carcinus maenas (Linnaeus, 1758), and sand shrimp, Crangon septemspinosaSay, 1818, represent to settling and recently-settled lobster postlarvae. Lobster survival within 48 hours varied between 80-100% in control aquaria. In contrast, survival was only 40-60% in the presence of sand shrimp and 0-20% in the presence of green crab. Some sand shrimp were observed successfully catching and preying upon lobster as they were exploring the substrate for settlement, whereas green crab seem to have captured lobsters after they had adopted a benthic mode of existence. Since both of these predators commonly inhabit shallow cobble-bottom habitat where lobster settlement occurs, they could be important predators of young lobsters. Given these findings, we believe that future research should undertake the challenging task of confirming predation by green crab and sand shrimp on young lobsters in nature, and we suggest that molecular analysis of predator gut contents is the most promising approach to this question.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it