Foraging by a young-of-the-year piscivore: the role of predator size, prey type, and density
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Young-of-the-year piscivores undergo ontogenetic diet shifts, but mechanisms influencing prey selection and implications for growth are unclear. We examined foraging and growth of 20- to 150-mm walleye (Sander vitreus) fed either zooplankton, benthic invertebrates, or fish over a range of prey densities in the laboratory. The number of each prey type consumed was influenced by walleye size and prey density. Walleye exhibited type II functional responses on each prey type; attack coefficients were constant across zooplankton and fish densities but decreased with benthic invertebrate densities. Handling time estimates were greater for fish than for other prey types but similar for zooplankton and benthos. Foraging efficiencies on zooplankton and benthic invertebrates increased with walleye size but were variable for fish prey. The smallest walleye size class (20 mm) had similar energy return (J·min1) and growth (g·day1) on zooplankton, benthic invertebrates, and fish. For larger walleye, both energy return and growth were highest on fish, intermediate on benthic invertebrates, and lowest on zooplankton. Diet shifts of juvenile piscivores and, consequently, growth can be explained by ontogenetic changes in foraging abilities and prey densities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".