The effect of prey density on foraging mode selection in juvenile lumpfish: balancing food intake with the metabolic cost of foraging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. In many species, individuals will alter their foraging strategy in response to changes in prey density. However, previous work has shown that prey density has differing effects on the foraging mode decisions of ectotherms as compared with endotherms. This is likely due to differences in metabolic demand; however, the relationship between metabolism and foraging mode choice in ectotherms has not been thoroughly studied. 2. Juvenile lumpfish Cyclopterus lumpus forage using one of two modes: they can actively search for prey while swimming, or they can 'sit-and-wait' for prey while clinging to the substrate using a ventral adhesive disk. The presence of these easily distinguishable foraging modes makes juvenile lumpfish ideal for the study of foraging mode choice in ectotherms. 3. Behavioural observations conducted during laboratory experiments showed that juvenile lumpfish predominantly use the 'cling' foraging mode when prey is abundant, but resort to the more costly 'swim' mode to seek out food when prey is scarce. The metabolic cost of active foraging was also quantified for juvenile lumpfish using swim-tunnel respirometry, and a model was devised to predict the prey density at which lumpfish should switch between the swim and cling foraging modes to maximize energy intake. 4. The results of this model do not agree with previous observations of lumpfish behaviour, and thus it appears that juvenile lumpfish do not try to maximize their net energetic gain. Instead, our data suggest that juvenile lumpfish forage in a manner that reduces activity and conserves space in their limited aerobic scope. This behavioural flexibility is of great benefit to this species, as it allows young individuals to divert energy towards growth as opposed to activity. In a broader context, our results support previous speculation that ectotherms often forage in a manner that maintains a minimum prey encounter rate, but does not necessarily maximize net energy gain.
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 | 0.002 | 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 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".