MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989926081 · doi:10.1017/s0025315412001634

Host selection by larvae of a marine insect<i>Halocladius variabilis</i>: nutritional dependency or escape from predation?

2012· article· en· W1989926081 on OpenAlexaff
Norah Brown, S.C. Mitchell, David J. Garbary

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPredationHost (biology)LarvaPredatorEcologyZoologyAmphipodaCrustacean

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Larvae of the Holarctic marine chironomid, Halocladius variabilis (Staeger), have strong fidelity to the tuft-forming brown alga, Elachista fucicola (Velley) Areschoug, an abundant epiphyte on intertidal fucoids of the North Atlantic. We show that larvae are sufficiently motile to select an algal host in a Petri dish within 3–4 cm, and that larvae show differential behaviour with respect to host selection in the presence or absence of a predator. In the absence of predators 53% of larvae found an algal host within 1 hour; however, after 24 hours, there was no significant difference in host selection. When an isopod predator ( Idotea sp.) was present, more larvae found a host within 1 hour (81%) and Elachista was chosen over three of the four other hosts. Furthermore, when larvae were present in Elachista , predator ( Carcinus maenus ) success was significantly reduced relative to two other algal hosts. The adaptive significance of Elachista as a refuge from predation was confirmed by experiments demonstrating that larval growth with other algal hosts was greater than with Elachista . These experiments suggest that microhabitat selection by larvae of H. variabilis reveals important tradeoffs for growth and predator avoidance.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.191 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Marine Biological Association of the United KingdomSame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207