Ballooning propensity of canopy and understorey spiders in a mature temperate hardwood forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Spiders frequently disperse and colonise habitats through ballooning, a passive aerial dispersal process. Ballooning is pre‐eminent in open habitat spider communities and its propensity can be modulated by habitat conditions and availability, and by life‐history traits such as body size, degree of specialisation, and feeding behaviour. 2. Using spiders from the canopy and understorey of a north‐temperate hardwood forest as a model system, our main objectives were to detect if foliage spiders of a mature forest disperse through ballooning, and identify life‐history traits that influence ballooning propensity. 3. Our results demonstrate that foliage spiders living in the canopy and understorey of a mature forest do balloon, and in some cases have very high ballooning propensities similarly to open field spiders. Species level models showed that small body size had a strong positive effect on ballooning for juveniles of species with large‐bodied adults, while individuals of small‐bodied species initiated ballooning regardless of size, habitat or development stage. A generalised linear mixed model indicated that small size web‐building spiders from the Retro Tibial Apophysis (RTA) and Orbicularia clades had the highest propensity for foliage spiders of this north‐temperate hardwood forest. 4. In conclusion, we provide the first demonstration that forest spiders can have high ballooning propensities and that ballooning propensity is negatively affected by body size and positively affected by the prominent use of silk to catch prey. However, spiders originating from the canopy and understorey of a north‐temperate hardwood forest did not differ in their ballooning propensities.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".